ArticleEpilepsy & behavior : E&B2023
Comparison of psychosocial screeners in an epilepsy clinic.
Article in Epilepsy & behavior : E&B, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Screenings are recommended for co-occurring conditions in pediatric epilepsy. However, there is limited research regarding which screener to implement in the clinic. This study aimed to compare different screening measures for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and emotional concerns in a pediatric epilepsy population during a routine neurology clinic visit. Fifty (22%) of 226 contacted parents of children with epilepsy ages 5-17 years old agreed to participate. Screening measures included the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Hyperactivity/Inattention (ADHD), Emotional Problems (E) subscales), the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Epilepsy Module (PedsQL-EM; Executive Functioning (EF), Mood/Behavior (M/B) subscales), and the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS). Analyses comparing measures included Chi Square, Pearson's correlation, and agreement statistics (Cohen's kappa, overall agreement). Consistent with prior literature, positive screening rates ranged from 40% to 72% for ADHD concerns and 38% to 46% for emotional concerns. Agreement between measures ranged from fair to substantial, with the highest agreement (85%; κ = 0.70) between the SDQ-E and PedsQL-EM-M/B. Although all measures rendered positive screens within expected rates, there are differences among the measures that inform screening measure selection.
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.