Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41837253›Full record

ArticleEpilepsy currents2026

Implementation Science Symposium: Moving the Needle in Epilepsy Care.

Clio Rubinos, Adam Ostendorf, Daniel Freedman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsy currents, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Clio RubinosThe University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1680-2302
Adam OstendorfNationwide Children's Hospital, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Daniel FreedmanDell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to improve epilepsy care, clinical practice guidelines need to focus on implementation and adoption. This summary of an American Epilepsy Society Annual Meeting symposium on implementation science reviews how this field offers a way to improve guideline utilization and help address knowledge-practice gaps. Historical examples in stroke and sepsis care, as well as present day examples in the treatment of status epilepticus, offer insight into how future guidelines can increase systematic uptake of evidence-based practices. The methodological tools of implementation science can also help address resource limitations and inequitable access to care. Future guideline development should incorporate implementation science practices to ensure the delivery of high-quality epilepsy care.

Indexed as

epilepsy careevidence-based practiceimplementation sciencestatus epilepticus

Identifiers

PMID41837253
PMCPMC12987738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.