ReviewTranslational pediatrics2015
Continuous electroencephalogram detection of non-convulsive seizures in the pediatric intensive care unit: review of the utility and impact on management and outcomes.
Review in Translational pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating Neuromonitoring in Pediatric Emergency Medicine: Exploring Two Options for Point-of-Care Electroencephalogram (pocEEG) via Patient Monitors-A Technical Note.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Continuous electroencephalography in the intensive care unit: A critical review and position statement from an Australian and New Zealand perspective.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2023Article
- A Commentary on Electrographic Seizure Management and Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Children.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Severe encephalopathy associated with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 variant infection in a neonate.Brain & development · 2022Article
- Continuous EEG in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: Adherence to Monitoring Criteria and Barriers to Adequate Implementation.Neurocritical care · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-convulsive seizures (NCS) are common among critically ill children with acute encephalopathy. Continuous electroencephalogram (CEEG) monitoring is an indispensable tool to detect NCS, which is essential to guiding management and assessing prognosis. Risk factors for NCS are highest in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) patients with altered mental status (AMS) and a recently witnessed clinical seizure, acute changes on neuroimaging, and/or interictal abnormalities on CEEG. Screening for at least 24 hours in at risk pediatric populations is ideal, but around half of NCS may be detected within the first hour. Rapid treatment of prolonged seizures or status epilepticus is critical, as higher seizure burdens have been associated with poorer outcomes in critically ill children. This review integrates current information on critically ill children with AMS and the use of CEEGs, risk factors for NCS, duration of CEEG monitoring, and how the detection of NCS impacts management and outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.