Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Phenobarbitone, phenytoin, carbamazepine, or sodium valproate for newly diagnosed adult epilepsy: a randomised comparative monotherapy trial.

Open access
Heller, A J, Chesterman, P, Elwes, R D, Crawford, P, Chadwick, D, Johnson, A L, Reynolds, E H·1995·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that most newly diagnosed epileptic patients can be satisfactorily treated with a single antiepileptic drug. We therefore undertook a prospective randomised pragmatic trial of the comparative efficacy and toxicity of four major antiepileptic drugs, utilised as monotherapy in newly diagnosed epileptic patients. Between 1981 and 1987 243 adult patients aged 16 years or over, newly referred to two district general hospitals with a minimum of two previously untreated tonic-clonic or partial with or without secondary generalised seizures were randomly allocated to treatment with phenobarbitone, phenytoin, carbamazepine, or sodium valproate. The protocol was designed to conform with standard clinical practice. Efficacy was assessed by time to first seizure after the start of treatment and time to enter one year remission. The overall outcome with all of the four drugs was good with 27% remaining seizure free and 75% entering one year of remission by three years of follow up. No significant differences between the four drugs were found for either measure of efficacy at one, two, or three years of follow up. The overall incidence of unacceptable side effects, necessitating withdrawal of the randomised drug, was 10%. For the individual drugs phenobarbitone (22%) was more likely to be withdrawn than phenytoin (3%), carbamazepine (11%), and sodium valproate (5%). In patients with newly diagnosed tonic-clonic or partial with or without secondary generalised seizures, the choice of drug will be more influenced by considerations of toxicity and costs.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jnnp.58.1.44

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Heller, A. J., Chesterman, P., Elwes, R. D., Crawford, P., Chadwick, D., Johnson, A. L., & Reynolds, E. H.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1995-01-01
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
44-50
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2076662133
Cited by
257
References
0
FWCI
15.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Phenobarbitone, phenytoin, carbamazepine, or sodium valproate for newly diagnosed adult epilepsy: a randomised comparative monotherapy trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp.58.1.44
The paper
Heller, A. J., Chesterman, P., Elwes, R. D., Crawford, P., Chadwick, D., Johnson, A. L., & Reynolds, E. H. (1995). Phenobarbitone, phenytoin, carbamazepine, or sodium valproate for newly diagnosed adult epilepsy: a randomised comparative monotherapy trial. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.58.1.44

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.