ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2026
Optimizing Antiseizure Medication Taper in the Epilepsy Monitoring Unit.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesInpatient video-EEG epilepsy monitoring aims to provide a safe environment for antiseizure medication (ASM) tapering to precipitate seizures, which is often required for diagnosis and treatment. However, there is no standardized taper protocol across institutions, which may contribute to increased morbidity through longer hospitalizations if the taper is too mild and bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (BTCSs) if too aggressive. This study investigates how ASM taper influences length of stay (LOS) and patient outcomes in the epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU), aiming to develop guidelines for medication taper strategies to maximize diagnostic yield while minimizing patient risk.
methodsWe used natural language processing to extract data from electronic medical records of 639 patients admitted to the University of Pennsylvania EMU between 2017 and 2023. We estimated ASM load, the total normalized sum of all ASM serum concentrations based on dose-dependent pharmacokinetic models, throughout each hospitalization. We applied LASSO (Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator) regression and mixed-effects models to identify predictors of LOS and BTCS risk as a function of taper speed and percentage of baseline ASM load in patients with (hBTCS) and without (nBTCS) a history of BTCS.
resultsTaper speed did not correlate with BTCS risk, although absolute ASM load did. Median ASM loads at seizure occurrence were 51% of baseline in the hBTCS group, 41% in the nBTCS group, and 39% in the unclear group. BTCS occurred at higher ASM loads in patients with hBTCS vs nBTCS. Median ASM loads at first EMU seizure were 33% for both hBTCS and nBTCS groups, while the unclear group had first seizures at lower loads (25% of baseline). Time to first seizure and number of baseline ASMs were positively correlated with longer hospital stays, suggesting that sequential medication taper delayed seizures and prolonged LOS without altering BTCS risk. DISCUSSION: Patient history and ASM load are critical factors in predicting BTCS. Rapid taper to approximately 50% baseline ASM load may more efficiently produce seizures without increased BTCS risk in patients without BTCS history. Individualized taper protocols remain advised, particularly for severe epilepsies. This study provides a foundation for quantitative, evidence-based guidelines to optimize ASM reduction strategies for safely precipitating seizures in EMUs.
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.