Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34824892›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2021

Epilepsy Treatment Complacency in Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals.

Patricia E Penovich, John M Stern, Danielle A Becker, Lucretia Long, Nancy Santilli, Lynanne McGuire, Eugenia Y Peck

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patricia E PenovichMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.
John M SternMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0002-3549-1642
Danielle A BeckerMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.
Lucretia LongMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.
Nancy SantilliMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.
Lynanne McGuireMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.
Eugenia Y PeckMinnesota Epilepsy Group (PEP), Saint Paul; Department of Neurology (JMS), University of California at Los Angeles; Penn Epilepsy Center (DAB), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Department of Neurology (LL), The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus; Human Care Systems Inc. (NS), San Francisco, CA; MedVal Scientific Information Services (LM), Princeton, NJ; and Health Division (EYP), Kantar Health, New York, NY.
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the perspectives of adult patients with epilepsy, caregivers, and health care professionals (HCPs) on treatment for seizures and treatment decisions, we developed and administered the STEP Survey (Seize the Truth of Epilepsy Perceptions).

methodsParticipants were recruited from online panel M3 and by Rare Patient Voice and completed the self-administered online STEP Survey. Analysis of variance and chi-square tests were used for group comparisons.

resultsThe STEP Survey was completed by 400 adult patients, 201 caregivers, and 258 HCPs. Patients estimated reporting 45% of their seizures to their HCP, whereas caregivers estimated 83% and HCPs estimated 73% were reported. The most common reason for not reporting seizures was that the seizures were not serious enough to mention (patients 57%; caregivers 66%). A minority of patients (25%) and caregivers (30%) were very or extremely likely to ask their HCP about changing antiseizure medication (ASM) in the next 12 months. The HCP was most frequently selected by patients, caregivers, and HCPs as the person who initiates discussion of changing ASMs (patients 73%/caregivers 66%/HCPs 75%) and increasing ASM dosage (patients 77%/caregivers 68%/HCPs 81%). A majority of patients (65%) and caregivers (68%) somewhat or strongly agreed that they do not change ASMs due to fear of getting worse. HCPs perceive this fear less often, stating that 50% of their patients feel afraid when a second ASM was added.

conclusionsImproved reporting of all seizures, discussion of treatment changes, and the impact of fear on treatment decisions provide opportunities to reduce complacency and optimize patient outcomes.

Identifiers

PMID34824892
PMCPMC8610521
OpenAlexW3135145465

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.