↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Anthelmintics for people with neurocysticercosis.

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Anthelmintics for people with neurocysticercosis.
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000215.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katharine Abba, Sridharan Ramaratnam, Lakshmi Narasimhan Ranganathan, Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group

Abstract

Neurocysticercosis is an infection of the brain by the larval stage of the pork tapeworm. In endemic areas it is a common cause of epilepsy. Anthelmintics (albendazole or praziquantel) may be given to kill the parasites. However, there are potential adverse effects, and the parasites may eventually die without treatment. To assess the effectiveness and safety of anthelmintics for people with neurocysticercosis. In May 2009 we searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and the mRCT. Randomized controlled trials comparing anthelmintics with placebo, no anthelmintic, or other anthelmintic regimen for people with neurocysticercosis. Two authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed each trial's risk of bias. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous variables, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We pooled data from trials with similar interventions and outcomes. For viable lesions in children, there were no trials. For viable lesions in adults, no difference was detected for albendazole compared with no treatment for recurrence of seizures (116 participants, one trial); but fewer participants with albendazole had lesions at follow up (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.70; 192 participants, two trials).For non-viable lesions in children, seizures recurrence was less common with albendazole compared with no treatment (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.75; 329 participants, four trials). There was no difference detected in the persistence of lesions at follow up (570 participants, six trials). For non-viable lesions in adults, there were no trials.In trials including viable, non-viable or mixed lesions (in both children and adults), headaches were more common with albendazole alone (RR 9.49, 95% CI 1.40 to 64.45; 106 participants, two trials), but no difference was detected in one trial giving albendazole with corticosteroids (116 participants, one trial). In patients with viable lesions, evidence from trials of adults suggests albendazole may reduce the number of lesions. In trials of non-viable lesions, seizure recurrence was substantially lower with albendazole, which is counter-intuitive. It may be that steroids influence headache during treatment, but further research is needed to test this.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 55 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 6 11%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 13 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2020.
All research outputs
#5,806,835
of 17,833,983 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,198
of 11,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,817
of 295,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,833,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.