Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29856080›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2018

New-onset epilepsy in the elderly.

Lily Chi Vu, Loretta Piccenna, Patrick Kwan, Terence J O'Brien

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lily Chi VuMelbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital; Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, 3050, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3198-4650
Loretta PiccennaDepartments of Neuroscience and Neurology, Central Clinical School, Monash University, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3895-8145
Patrick KwanMelbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital; Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, 3050, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7310-276X
Terence J O'BrienMelbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital; Departments of Medicine and Neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, 3050, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7198-8621
The Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUThe Alfred Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People who are 60 years old and older have the highest incidence of developing new-onset epilepsy. The increase of the ageing population has resulted in a greater number of patients with new-onset epilepsy or at risk of developing the condition. Previously published review articles regarding epilepsy in older patients have had a broad focus, including people who were diagnosed with epilepsy in their childhood or middle age. The present review focuses on the causes, treatment, prognosis and psychosocial impact of new-onset epilepsy in people aged ≥60 years. Following a search of the medical electronic databases and relevant references, we identified 22 studies overall that met the inclusion criteria. Only four randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified that compared different antiepileptic drug treatments in this population, demonstrating that newer-generation antiepileptic drugs (e.g. lamotrigine and levetiracetam) were generally better tolerated. One uncontrolled study provided promising evidence of good outcomes and safety for surgical resection as a treatment for people with uncontrolled seizures. Five studies reported that people ≥60 years with new-onset epilepsy have significant cognitive impairments (e.g. memory loss) and psychological issues including depression, anxiety and fatigue. We found that there is limited evidence to guide treatment in people with Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy. The specific features of new-onset epilepsy in this target population significantly influences the choice of treatment. Cognitive and psychiatric screening before treatment may be useful for management. Two studies with proposed guidelines were identified but no formal clinical practice guidelines exist for this special population to assist with appropriate management. There is a need for more RCTs that investigate effective treatments with limited side effects. More research studies on the psychosocial effects of new-onset epilepsy, and long-term outcomes, for people aged ≥60 years are also required.

Indexed as

AgedAge of OnsetAnticonvulsantsCognitive DysfunctionEpilepsyHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicPrognosisQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeAnticonvulsantsantiepileptic drugselderlynew-onset epilepsypsychosocialrandomized controlled trialstreatment

Identifiers

PMID29856080
PMCPMC6138506
OpenAlexW2805473242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.