Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28186943›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

Wordless intervention for people with epilepsy and learning disabilities (WIELD): a randomised controlled feasibility trial.

Silvana E Mengoni, Bob Gates, Georgina Parkes, David Wellsted, Garry Barton, Howard Ring, Mary Ellen Khoo, Deela Monji-Patel, Karin Friedli, Asif Zia and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Silvana E MengoniDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Bob GatesInstitute for Practice, Interdisciplinary Research and Enterprise (INSPIRE), University of West London, London, UK.
Georgina ParkesLearning Disabilities Services, Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, St Albans, UK.
David WellstedDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Garry BartonNorwich Medical School and Norwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Howard RingDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Mary Ellen KhooResearch and Development, Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, St Albans, UK.
Deela Monji-PatelResearch and Development, Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, St Albans, UK.
Karin FriedliCentre for Research in Primary and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Asif ZiaLearning Disabilities Services, Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, St Albans, UK.
Lisa IrvineNorwich Medical School and Norwich Clinical Trials Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Marie-Anne DurandDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Health Services and Clinical Research, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0213-30042
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the feasibility of a full-scale randomised controlled trial of a picture booklet to improve quality of life for people with epilepsy and learning disabilities. TRIAL

designA randomised controlled feasibility trial. Randomisation was not blinded and was conducted using a centralised secure database and a blocked 1:1 allocation ratio.

settingEpilepsy clinics in 1 English National Health Service (NHS) Trust.

participantsPatients with learning disabilities and epilepsy who had: a seizure within the past 12 months, meaningful communication and a carer with sufficient proficiency in English.

interventionParticipants in the intervention group used a picture booklet with a trained researcher, and a carer present. These participants kept the booklet, and were asked to use it at least twice more over 20 weeks. The control group received treatment as usual, and were provided with a booklet at the end of the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: 7 feasibility criteria were used relating to recruitment, data collection, attrition, potential effect on epilepsy-related quality of life (Epilepsy and Learning Disabilities Quality of Life Scale, ELDQOL) at 4-week, 12-week and 20-week follow-ups, feasibility of methodology, acceptability of the intervention and potential to calculate cost-effectiveness. OUTCOME: The recruitment rate of eligible patients was 34% and the target of 40 participants was reached. There was minimal missing data and attrition. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed; data from the outcome measures suggest a benefit from the intervention on the ELDQOL behaviour and mood subscales at 4 and 20 weeks follow-up. The booklet and study methods were positively received, and no adverse events were reported. There was a positive indication of the potential for a cost-effectiveness analysis.

conclusionsAll feasibility criteria were fully or partially met, therefore confirming feasibility of a definitive trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN80067039.

Indexed as

PamphletsPatient Education as TopicQuality of LifeAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisEpilepsyFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLearning DisabilitiesMaleMiddle AgedSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeMENTAL HEALTHPSYCHIATRY

Identifiers

PMID28186943
PMCPMC5128894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.