↓ Skip to main content

Optimizing the Diagnosis and Management of Dravet Syndrome: Recommendations From a North American Consensus Panel

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Neurology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

17 tweeters
5 patents
4 Facebook pages


105 Dimensions

Readers on

187 Mendeley
Optimizing the Diagnosis and Management of Dravet Syndrome: Recommendations From a North American Consensus Panel
Published in
Pediatric Neurology, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2017.01.025
Pubmed ID

Elaine C. Wirrell, Linda Laux, Elizabeth Donner, Nathalie Jette, Kelly Knupp, Mary Anne Meskis, Ian Miller, Joseph Sullivan, Michelle Welborn, Anne T. Berg


To establish standards for early, cost-effective, and accurate diagnosis; optimal therapies for seizures; and recommendations for evaluation and management of comorbidities for children and adults with Dravet syndrome, using a modified Delphi process. An expert panel was convened comprising epileptologists with nationally recognized expertise in Dravet syndrome and parents of children with Dravet syndrome, whose experience and understanding was enhanced by their active roles in Dravet syndrome associations. Panelists were asked to base their responses to questions both on their clinical expertise and results of a literature review that was forwarded to each panelist. Three rounds of online questionnaires were conducted to identify areas of consensus and strength of that consensus, as well as areas of contention. The panel consisted of 13 physicians and five family members. Strong consensus was reached regarding typical clinical presentation of Dravet syndrome, range of electroencephalography and magnetic resonance imaging findings, need for genetic testing, critical information that should be conveyed to families at diagnosis, priorities for seizure control and typical degree of control, seizure triggers and recommendations for avoidance, first- and second-line therapies for seizures, requirement and indications for rescue therapy, specific recommendations for comorbidity screening, and need for family support. Consensus was not as strong regarding later therapies, including vagus nerve stimulation and callosotomy, and for specific therapies of associated comorbidities. Beyond the initial treatment with benzodiazepines and use of valproate, there was no consensus on the optimal in-hospital management of convulsive status epilepticus. We were able to identify areas where there was strong consensus that we hope will (1) inform health care providers on optimal diagnosis and management of patients with Dravet syndrome, (2) support reimbursement from insurance companies for genetic testing and Dravet syndrome-specific therapies, and (3) improve quality of life for patients with Dravet syndrome and their families by avoidance of unnecessary testing and provision of an early accurate diagnosis allowing optimal selection of therapeutic strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 187 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 12%
Other 23 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 9%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Other 41 22%
Unknown 44 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 28%
Neuroscience 21 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 4%
Psychology 6 3%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 57 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 04 January 2021.
All research outputs
of 17,366,233 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Neurology
of 1,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 365,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Neurology
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,366,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,943 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
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 365,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.