ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Management of epilepsy in pregnancy in eastern China: A survey from the Zhejiang association against epilepsy.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pre-pregnancy fertility guidance for women of childbearing age with epilepsy: A scoping review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Review
- Hippocampal sclerosis in women with temporal lobe epilepsy: seizure and pregnancy outcomes.Acta epileptologica · 2024Article
- Pregnancy-related knowledge in women with epilepsy in childbearing age: A pilot questionnaire survey from China.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Competency in the management of women of childbearing age with epilepsy among primary care and specialist doctors in Estonia.Epilepsy & behavior reports · 2023Article
- Pregnancy characteristics and adverse outcomes in offspring of women with epilepsy: a prospective registry study from Mainland China.Frontiers in neurology · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to evaluate the knowledge of the board members of the Zhejiang Association Against Epilepsy (ZAAE) regarding pregnancy of women with epilepsy (WWE), as well as their clinical practice and obstacles in the management of WWE. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among the board members of the ZAAE using a questionnaire based on the management guidelines for WWE during pregnancy in China. We recorded the demographic characteristics of the surveyed practitioners, the coincidence rate of each question, clinical practice, and the barriers encountered in managing WWE. Results: This survey showed that the average knowledge score of the surveyed practitioners was 71.02%, and the knowledge score of neurologists was higher than that of neurosurgeons. Knowledge regarding the following three aspects was relatively poor: whether WWE is associated with an increased risk of cesarean section and preterm delivery, the preferred analgesic drugs for WWE during delivery, and the time of postpartum blood concentration monitoring. After multiple linear regression analysis, the score of neurologists was correlated to the number of pregnant WWE treated each year. In addition, the biggest difficulty in the management of WWE during pregnancy is the lack of patient education and doctors training on pregnant epilepsy management. Conclusion: Our study revealed the ZAAE board members' knowledge and management status of pregnant WWE. In addition, our study identified the biggest obstacle to the management of WWE during pregnancy, and emphasized the importance of training and practice of epilepsy knowledge during pregnancy for practitioners and the significance of interdisciplinary communication.
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.