Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41190498›Full record

ReviewEpilepsia open2026

Self-completed patient-reported outcome measures in adults with epilepsy: A review.

Alison L Conquest, Terence J O'Brien, Patrick Kwan, Jacqueline A French, Charles B Malpas, Emma C Foster

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Epilepsia open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

6 authors.

Alison L ConquestDepartment of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0009-0000-9388-1342
Terence J O'BrienDepartment of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Patrick KwanDepartment of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7310-276X
Jacqueline A FrenchNYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2242-8027
Charles B MalpasDepartment of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0534-3718
Emma C FosterDepartment of Neuroscience, School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8958-3844

Funding

LivaNova
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epilepsy affects 65 million people worldwide, and is a World Health Organization priority disease as highlighted in their 2022-2031 Intersectoral Global Action Plan (IGAP) on Epilepsy and other Neurological Disorders. IGAP's objectives include improving epilepsy treatment and care. Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) may assist with this. PROMs are self-report instruments that assess the lived experience of disease, for example, quality of life, mood, and treatment adverse effects. Regulatory agencies recommend including PROMs in clinical trials, and incorporating PROMs into routine clinical practice may improve patient outcomes. We conducted a narrative review of PubMed and health regulatory agencies' guidelines to identify PROMs used in clinical epilepsy research and practice. We identified 390 unique PROMs used in epilepsy settings. We summarize the practical considerations for PROMs selection, including the various psychometric properties that can be used to measure how "good" a PROM is; the role for generic, neurology-specific, and epilepsy-specific PROMs; and ways to optimize the collection of PROMs in clinical settings. This review discusses the strengths and limitations of 22 PROMs, covering four domains (health-related quality of life, disability and seizure severity, mood, and antiseizure medication adverse effects), that are commonly used in clinical epilepsy research and practice. This article may serve as a useful reference for researchers and clinicians when selecting PROMs for use in clinical epilepsy trials and routine clinical practice, and complements the recently published report from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement that recommends five specific PROMs assessing quality of life, depression, anxiety, cognition, and sleep. The judicious selection and application of PROMs may lead to better understanding of patient experiences, inform clinical decision-making, and ultimately improve outcomes. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires completed by patients, assisting with communication of their lived experience of disease with clinicians. PROMs cover topics such as quality of life, disability, mood, and treatment side effects. PROMs may improve patient satisfaction and communication with healthcare providers, detect hitherto undisclosed issues, and can be used to monitor treatment response. This current review summarizes the strengths and limitations of 22 PROMs that are commonly used in clinical epilepsy research and practice.

Indexed as

EpilepsyPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresSelf ReportAdultHumansPsychometricsQuality of Lifeepilepsymood disorderspatient reported outcomequality of lifeseizure

Identifiers

PMID41190498
PMCPMC12903808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.