ArticleCureus2022
Utilization of Epilepsy Monitoring Unit by General Neurologists.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying inpatient hospitalizations with continuous electroencephalogram monitoring from administrative data.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) is a growing service that allows physicians to evaluate, diagnose, and manage epilepsy in a safe and cost-effective way. However, observations have indicated that the EMU is being underutilized by general neurology practice, possibly due to the lack of access and specific criteria known to all neurologists. There is limited data as of yet to support these observations. This study reviewed the rate of referral to the EMU from outpatient general neurology clinics at our institution. Methods In this retrospective study, records of 350 patients, 18 years or older with a diagnosis or diagnostic workup of epilepsy, managed by neurologists who did not specialize in epilepsy, were reviewed. We classified patients into three groups: ineligible for EMU referral, eligible and referred to EMU, and eligible but not referred to EMU based on six criteria namely characterization, classification, localization, determination of seizure frequency, medication adjustment, and differentiation between seizures and medication side effects. Results Our results demonstrated that 36.7% of patients who did meet the criteria were not referred to EMU. The most common criteria for patient referral in both groups, referred and not referred, was the characterization of seizures as epileptic or functional. Conclusion Our results show that EMU is underutilized by our general neurology clinics. Providing more information and increased awareness about criteria for long-term monitoring in EMU can improve the utility of this valuable tool and would be beneficial to patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.