Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38832198›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Challenges and Prospects in Epilepsy Monitoring Units: A Comprehensive Review of Logistic Barriers.

Anas Albarrak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  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

1 author.

Anas AlbarrakDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological diseases with a prevalence ranging from 0.5% to 2% in different sittings. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that nearly 80% of this burden is borne by resource-poor countries where even conventional electroencephalogram (EEG) coverage is dramatically short.  Video EEG monitoring applied for days as conducted in epilepsy monitoring units (EMUs) is aimed at seizure localization, anti-seizure medication (ASM) adjustment, or epilepsy surgery evaluation and planning. However, the EEG approach in EMUs has its obstacles. The present article is aimed to concentrate on the logistic challenges of EMUs, discussing existing data and limitations and offering suggestions for future planning to enhance the utilization of existing technology. Shortages of adult and pediatric epileptologists, qualified nurses, as well as EEG technologists have been reported in different countries. Moreover, injuries and falls, psychosis, status epilepticus, and unexpected death have been stated to be the most frequent safety issues in EMUs. Enhancements to mitigate logistical and healthcare system-related barriers in EMUs include the implementation of large cohort studies and the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) for the identification and categorization of specific risks among EMU admissions. The establishment of EMUs and their associated challenges and barriers are best acknowledged through discussions and dialogue with various stakeholders.

Indexed as

adult neurologydata safety and monitoringepilepsy monitoring unitepilepsy researchpatient-centered care

Identifiers

PMID38832198
PMCPMC11144575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.