Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34310860›Full record

Observational studyEpilepsia open2021

Demonstrating the feasibility of digital health to support pediatric patients in South Africa.

Elin Haf Davies, Karen Fieggen, Jo Wilmshurst, Obuchinezia Anyanwu, Richard Joseph Burman, Sandra Komarzynski

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Epilepsia open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Smartphone applications for the management of epilepsy in children and adolescents.Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Elin Haf DaviesAparito Ltd, Wrexham, UK.
Karen FieggenDivision of Human Genetics, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Observatory, South Africa.
Jo WilmshurstDepartment of Paediatric Neurology, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-7328-1796
Obuchinezia AnyanwuAparito Ltd, Wrexham, UK.
Richard Joseph BurmanDepartment of Paediatric Neurology, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3107-7871
Sandra KomarzynskiAparito Ltd, Wrexham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3886-6494
University of Cape Town · ZAWrexham Maelor Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveResources for management of epilepsy in Africa are extremely limited reinforcing the need to develop innovative strategies for optimizing care. Studies have shown that the prevalence of epilepsy in low- and middle-income countries is substantially greater than in more resourced countries. The objective of this report was to demonstrate that mobile Health (mHealth) technologies have the potential to improve the management of epilepsy in Africa.

methodsThe feasibility of technology-based home monitoring was investigated in an observational study of 40 children with refractory epilepsy or epilepsy associated with intellectual disability and/or behavior difficulties in South Africa. Technology-based home monitoring was implemented for six months. Physical activity, sleep, and heart rate were continuously monitored with a wearable device. Caregivers completed regular mobile Patient Reported Outcomes (mPROs) and reported seizures and ad hoc events using a dedicated app. Feasibility was assessed and descriptively measured for recruitment, retention, and engagement of the participants.

resultsThe mHealth technology was able to capture important information that gives an impression of the overall experience of the children and their caregivers. Thirty-seven participants (94.9%) reported at least one clinical event. Seventy-nine percent of caregivers reported seizure events in their children, which were the primary event anticipated. Median engagement with the wearable device and monthly mPROs was 30.8% and 57.1%, respectively. However, most participants (87%) had to be given smartphones for them to have Bluetooth capabilities and access to the study app. Tolerability to the device was impacted by the difficult living circumstances of caregivers that induced fear of loss or theft. SIGNIFICANCE: The study showed how the use of remote patient monitoring in the form of mHealth can benefit epilepsy patients, despite highly variable engagement with the technology. The combination of mPROs and wearable devices generated informative datasets that will allow clinicians but also the children and their caregivers to better understand and manage the disease.

Indexed as

ExerciseWearable Electronic DevicesChildFeasibility StudiesHumansSmartphoneSouth Africafeasibilitymobile healthrefractory epilepsywearable technology

Identifiers

PMID34310860
PMCPMC8633462
OpenAlexW3186939918

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.