ReviewEpilepsia2026
Epilepsy treatment over time: The chess game analogy for choosing, adjusting, and adding antiseizure medications.
Review in Epilepsia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The Changing Paradigm of Neuroinflammation in Epilepsy: A Bibliometric Analysis from Microglial Activation to Gut-Brain Axis.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Recurrent seizures have such a negative impact upon the lives of persons with epilepsy that their prevention is a constant preoccupation of neurologists. Despite the large number of antiseizure medications (ASMs) currently available and of publications on their putative efficacy, adverse effects, and order of preference to start treatment, there is very little information on how to manage treatment over time. Here, we propose the analogy of a chess game to encourage neurologists to develop strategic decisions at each point in time to correctly manage ASMs toward the best possible degree of seizure control. We leverage that the strategy of the chess player must be adapted to each move of the opponent, to emphasize the need to individualize the treatment of epileptic seizures according to variations in response to ASMs that occur over time. The chess player calculates the best move at each point in the chess game just as the neurologist draws upon their knowledge and experience to select the best ASM regimen for a given patient and adjust it based on their "gestalt" of the patient's response to each treatment change. This gestalt, however, is firmly grounded in rational, flexible adaptations to ASM treatment protocols. Strategic decision-making in several epilepsy scenarios is given to illustrate the utility of the chess analogy.
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.