Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31168493›Full record

ArticleEpilepsia open2019

A home-based, primary-care model for epilepsy care in India: Basis and design.

Gagandeep Singh, Suman Sharma, Rajnder K Bansal, Raj K Setia, Sarit Sharma, Namita Bansal, Anuraag Chowdhury, Jatinder S Goraya, Susmita Chatterjee, Sukhpreet Kaur and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsia open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Psychological treatments for people with epilepsy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

13 authors.

Gagandeep SinghDepartment of Neurology Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6661-3553
Suman SharmaThe Research & Development Unit Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Rajnder K BansalDepartment of Neurology Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Raj K SetiaPunjab Remote Sensing Centre Ludhiana India.
Sarit SharmaDepartment of Social & Preventive Medicine Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Namita BansalThe Research & Development Unit Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Anuraag ChowdhuryDepartment of Social & Preventive Medicine Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Jatinder S GorayaDepartment of Paediatrics Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0906-0267
Susmita ChatterjeePublic Health Foundation of India Delhi India.
Sukhpreet KaurThe Research & Development Unit Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Manpreet KaurThe Research & Development Unit Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Shivani KalraCollege of Nursing Dayanand Medical College Ludhiana India.
Josemir W SanderNIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6041-9661

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA cluster-randomized trial of home-based care using primary-care resources for people with epilepsy has been set up to optimize epilepsy care in resource-limited communities in low- and middle-income countries. The primary aim is to determine whether treatment adherence to antiepileptic drugs is better with home-based care or with routine clinic-based care. The secondary aims are to compare the effects of the two care pathways on seizure control and quality of life.

methodsThe home-based intervention comprises epilepsy medication provision, adherence reinforcement, and epilepsy self-management and stigma management guidance provided by an auxiliary nurse-midwife equivalent. The experimental group will be compared to a routine clinic-based care group using a cluster-randomized design in which the unit of analysis is a cluster of 10 people with epilepsy residing in an area cared for by a single accredited government grass-roots health care worker. The primary outcome is treatment adherence as measured by monthly tablet counts supplemented by two self-completed questionnaires. The secondary outcomes include monthly seizure frequency, time to first seizure (in days) after enrollment, proportion of patients experiencing seizure freedom for the duration of the study, and quality of life measured by the "Personal Impact of Epilepsy Scale," all assessed by an independent study nurse.

resultsThe screening phase and neurologic evaluations and randomizations have been recently completed and follow-up is underway. SIGNIFICANCE: The results of the trial are likely to have substantial bearing on the development of governmental policies and strategies to provide coverage and care for patients with epilepsy in resource-limited countries.

Indexed as

adherencecluster‐randomized trialcommunityepilepsyprimary care

Identifiers

PMID31168493
PMCPMC6546011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.