The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diagnosing refractory epilepsy: response to sequential treatment schedules
Abstract
Diagnosing refractory epilepsy would facilitate referral for specialist pharmacological review and early consideration of epilepsy surgery. An outcomes study was undertaken in an unselected cohort of newly diagnosed patients to determine the number of antiepileptic drug (AED) regimens needed to be failed before the epilepsy could be designated as pharmacoresistant. Between July 1982 and May 2001, 780 adolescents and adults prescribed their first AED at the Western Infirmary in Glasgow, Scotland provided longitudinal data suitable for analysis. Overall, 504 (64.6%) patients became seizure free for at least 12 months. Of these, 462 (59.2%) remained in remission, while 42 (5.4%) relapsed and subsequently developed refractory epilepsy. The relapse rate peaked at 10.4% after 8 years of follow‐up. The other 276 (35.4%) patients were uncontrolled from the outset. Prognosis appeared better in seniors (85% remission, P < 0.001) and adolescents (65% remission, P < 0.01) than in the remainder of the population (55% remission). Overall response rates with the first, second and third treatment schedules were 50.4, 10.7 and 2.7%, respectively, with only 0.8% patients responding optimally to further drug trials. Patients not tolerating at least one AED schedule did better than those failing because of lack of efficacy. These data suggest that suitable patients failing two AED regimens should be referred for epilepsy surgery. Those who do not attain long‐term seizure freedom with the first three treatment schedules are likely to have refractory epilepsy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Early Identification of Refractory Epilepsy
Kwan, P., & Brodie, M. J. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200002033420503 · Cited by 5,204
Self-citation
Cited by
Kwan, P., Arzimanoglou, A., Berg, A. T., Brodie, M. J., Allen Hauser, W., Mathern, G., Moshé, S. L., Perucca, E., Wiebe, S., & French, J. (2010) · Epilepsia · doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02397.x · Cited by 4,877
Self-citationThe epidemiology of drug‐resistant epilepsy: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Kalilani, L., Sun, X., Pelgrims, B., Noack‐Rink, M., & Villanueva, V. (2018) · Epilepsia · doi:10.1111/epi.14596 · Cited by 587
Predictors of pharmacoresistant epilepsy
Hitiris, N., Mohanraj, R., Norrie, J., Sills, G. J., & Brodie, M. J. (2007) · Epilepsy Research · doi:10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2007.06.003 · Cited by 527
Self-citationComparison of levetiracetam and controlled-release carbamazepine in newly diagnosed epilepsy
Brodie, M. J., Perucca, E., Ryvlin, P., Ben-Menachem, E., & Meencke, H.-J. (2007) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000252941.50833.4a · Cited by 467
Self-citationPicot, M., Baldy‐Moulinier, M., Daurès, J., Dujols, P., & Crespel, A. (2008) · Epilepsia · doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2008.01579.x · Cited by 455
Metadata
- Authors
- Mohanraj, R., & Brodie, M. J.
- Venue
- European Journal of Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 277-282
- ISSN
- 1351-5101 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-1331
- OpenAlex
- W1991097570
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diagnosing refractory epilepsy: response to sequential treatment schedules. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01215.x
- The paper
- Mohanraj, R., & Brodie, M. J. (2006). Diagnosing refractory epilepsy: response to sequential treatment schedules. European Journal of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2006.01215.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.