Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28706099›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Cross-sectional study of the hospital management of adult patients with a suspected seizure (EPIC2).

Jon Mark Dickson, Hannah Dudhill, Jane Shewan, Sue Mason, Richard A Grünewald, Markus Reuber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Characteristics and causes in patients presenting with convulsions in the Danish prehospital setting.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Dissociative seizures in the emergency room: room for improvement.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Jon Mark DicksonThe Academic Unit of Primary Medical Care, The Medical School, Sheffield, England.
Hannah DudhillSheffield Medical School, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
Jane ShewanResearch and Development, Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust, Wakefield, UK.
Sue MasonSchool of Health and Related Research, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Richard A GrünewaldDepartment of Neurology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Markus ReuberAcademic Neurology Unit, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the clinical characteristics, management and outcomes of patients taken to hospital by emergency ambulance after a suspected seizure.

designQuantitative cross-sectional retrospective study of a consecutive series of patients.

settingAn acute hospital trust in a large city in England.

participantsIn 2012-2013, the regions' ambulance service managed 605 481 emergency incidents, 74 141/605 481 originated from Sheffield (a large city in the region), 2121/74 141 (2.9%) were suspected seizures and 178/2121 occurred in May 2012. We undertook detailed analysis of the medical records of the 91/178 patients who were transported to the city's acute hospital. After undertaking a retrospective review of the medical records, the best available aetiological explanation for the seizures was determined.

resultsThe best available aetiological explanation for 74.7% (68/91) of the incidents was an epileptic seizure, 11.0% (10/91) were psychogenic non-epileptic seizures and 9.9% (9/91) were cardiogenic events. The epileptic seizures fall into the following four categories: first epileptic seizure (13.2%, 12/91), epileptic seizure with a historical diagnosis of epilepsy (30.8%, 28/91), recurrent epileptic seizures without a historical diagnosis of epilepsy (20.9%, 19/91) and acute symptomatic seizures (9.9%, 9/91). Of those with seizures (excluding cardiogenic events), 2.4% (2/82) of patients were seizing on arrival in the Emergency Department (ED), 19.5% (16/82) were postictal and 69.5% (57/82) were alert. 63.4% (52/82) were discharged at the end of their ED attendance and 36.5% (19/52) of these had no referral or follow-up.

conclusionsMost suspected seizures are epileptic seizures but this is a diagnostically heterogeneous group. Only a small minority of patients require emergency medical care but most are transported to hospital. Few patients receive expert review and many are discharged home without referral to a specialist leaving them at risk of further seizures and the associated morbidity, mortality and health services costs of poorly controlled epilepsy.

Indexed as

AmbulancesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesEmergency Service, HospitalEnglandEpilepsyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient DischargeRecurrenceReferral and ConsultationEpilepsyNeurology

Identifiers

PMID28706099
PMCPMC5541576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.