ArticleEpilepsy & behavior : E&B2025
Explaining the unknown: causal illness beliefs among people with epilepsy without identified cause.
Article in Epilepsy & behavior : E&B, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe explored the relations of demographic and clinical characteristics to causal illness beliefs ("attributions") among people with epilepsy without identified non-genetic (acquired) cause.
methodsWe surveyed 644 patients treated at a comprehensive epilepsy center (2019-2022) and abstracted data from their medical records. Participants completed the revised Illness Perception Questionnaire, rating the likelihood of 17 possible causes of their epilepsy, and named what they believed was the most important cause in a free-response item. We collapsed causal attributions into five factors: genetics, psychosocial, non-genetic biological, fate, and chance. We assessed associations of causal attributions with demographic and clinical epilepsy characteristics using multivariate generalized linear and multinomial logistic regression models.
resultsParticipants with a family history of epilepsy were more likely to endorse genetic causes (adjusted mean [aM] = 2.85) than were those without (aM = 2.14), p < 0.001. Those with a high school education or less (aM = 1.78) were more likely to endorse psychosocial causes (e.g., psychological distress) than were college graduates (aM = 1.46), p < 0.001. Participants whose last seizure was < 1 year ago were more likely to attribute their epilepsy to psychosocial causes (aM = 1.55) than were those whose last seizure was ≥ 1 year ago (aM = 1.33), p < 0.001. In the free-response item, the causes considered most important were: non-genetic biological (43.8 %), genetics (26.8 %), psychosocial (20.7 %), fate (6.0 %), and chance (2.7 %). SIGNIFICANCE: Demographic and clinical characteristics are associated with causal attributions of epilepsy. These relationships have implications for epilepsy management and treatment and suggest a need for improved patient-centered communication about epilepsy.
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.