ArticleBMC medical education2024
Clinical practice applicability and relevance to non-specialists of a paediatric EEG online learning tool.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. 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.
- Expert opinions on pediatric EEG training for non-epilepsy specialists in sub-Saharan Africa.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPaediatric electroencephalography (EEG) training is inadequate amongst healthcare practitioners and technicians managing children with epilepsy in sub-Saharan Africa. An entry level handbook was developed for healthcare practitioners in sub-Saharan Africa and subsequently made globally accessible via the International Child Neurology Teaching Network.
aimTo investigate the usefulness of a paediatric online EEG handbook.
methodA survey of the ICNApedia online EEG handbook was circulated (December 2021-June 2022), to all 108 handbook registered participants (39 countries) via the research electronic data capture (REDCap) from the University of Cape Town (UCT).
resultsFifty participants from 25 countries responded: 8 from high income, 16 upper-middle income, 21 lower-middle income and 5 from low-income. 32 (64%) fully and 18 (36%) partially completed the survey. 35/50 (70%) had completed the handbook and seven respondents had partially completed the handbook. Responses supported the handbook as a good entry point to learn EEGs, especially for paediatrics. Likert scale ratings supported the handbook as relevant for gaining/enhancing knowledge and improving diagnosis and management of patients with confidence. The handbook was considered user friendly, comprehensible, and provided a practical experience. For improving EEG reading skills the handbook helped skills development via reinforcement and good illustrations. 29/32 (90%) of respondents confirmed that they are using learnt skills from the handbook in their current work.
conclusionIn resource limited settings non-specialist clinicians often provide extended services including EEG interpretation. The survey supports that the handbook is supporting this niche skills area, especially for the accessibility of knowledge gained. The handbook will continue to be adapted in-line with survey feedback.
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.