The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Treatment of first tonic-clonic seizure does not improve the prognosis of epilepsy
Abstract
It is widely agreed that after two or more seizures patients should be given antiepileptic treatment, but there is still controversy about the treatment of patients after a first unprovoked seizure. In a multicenter, randomized, open trial, patients with a first tonic-clonic seizure were randomized to immediate treatment (carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, or sodium valproate) or to treatment only after another seizure. Fifty-two (24%) of the 215 patients randomized to immediate treatment and 85 (42%) of the 204 randomized to delayed treatment experienced seizure recurrence during follow-up. Age, acute treatment of the seizure with benzodiazepines, remote etiologic factors, and EEG abnormalities were significant predictors of relapse. Of the immediately treated patients, 87% had no seizures for a year and 68% had no seizures for 2 years, whereas only slightly fewer initially untreated patients (83% and 60%) achieved these endpoints. Patients treated after the first seizure and those treated after seizure relapse had the same time-dependent probability of achieving 1 and 2 seizure-free years. None of the variables that were prognostic predictors of relapse was significantly associated with the probability of having 1 or 2 years of seizure control. Anticonvulsants in patients presenting a first tonic-clonic seizure reduce the risk of relapse; however, 50% of patients who are not treated will never experience a second seizure. Moreover, the probability of long-term remission is not influenced by treatment of the first seizure.
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
Bayes Estimates for the Linear Model
Lindley, D. V., & Smith, A. F. M. (1972) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00885.x · Cited by 2,025
The Lewy body variant of Alzheimer's disease: A clinical and pathologic entity
Hansen, L., Salmon, D., Galasko, D., Masliah, E., Katzman, R., DeTeresa, R., Thal, L., Pay, M. M., Hofstetter, R., Klauber, M., et al. (1990) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.40.1.1 · Cited by 1,068
Cited by
Early Identification of Refractory Epilepsy
Kwan, P., & Brodie, M. J. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200002033420503 · Cited by 5,204
Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: Multiple Hypotheses, Few Answers
Tang, F., Hartz, A. M. S., & Bauer, B. (2017) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2017.00301 · Cited by 482
Marson, A., Jacoby, A., Johnson, A., Kim, L., Gamble, C., & Chadwick, D. (2005) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66694-9 · Cited by 438
Krumholz, A., Wiebe, S., Gronseth, G. S., Gloss, D. S., Sanchez, A. M., Kabir, A. A., Liferidge, A. T., Martello, J. P., Kanner, A. M., Shinnar, S., et al. (2015) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000001487 · Cited by 343
Kim, L. G., Johnson, T. L., Marson, A. G., & Chadwick, D. W. (2006) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(06)70383-0 · Cited by 320
Metadata
- Authors
- Musicco, M., Beghi, E., Solari, A., Viani, F., & First Seizure Trial Group (FIRST Group)
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 1997-10
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 991-998
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2007787031
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.26
- 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: Treatment of first tonic-clonic seizure does not improve the prognosis of epilepsy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.49.4.991
- The paper
- Musicco, M., Beghi, E., Solari, A., Viani, F., & First Seizure Trial Group (FIRST Group). (1997). Treatment of first tonic-clonic seizure does not improve the prognosis of epilepsy. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.49.4.991
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.