Current beliefs and attitudes regarding epilepsy in Mali
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In Mali, epilepsy affects 15 individuals per thousand. Perceptions and attitudes have not seemingly evolved with advancing medical knowledge. The objective of this study was to assess parental beliefs and attitudes in families with and without affected children. METHODS: We enrolled 720 pediatric patients, half of whom had epilepsy, at Mali's largest hospital. We conducted semistructured interviews with the accompanying parent. Control families with unaffected patients and also had affected children were excluded. RESULTS: In total, 67% and 24% of families with and without epilepsy, respectively, lived in rural environments. Interviewees were mostly mothers in their 30s; 80% had not completed high school. About 22% of parents without an affected child had witnessed a seizure. During a seizure, 94% of parents with an affected child and 49% of parents without an affected child, respectively, would intervene; 7.5% and 21%, respectively, would wet the patient's face with cool water. Although parents with an affected child had more intimate knowledge of seizures, misconceptions prevailed, perhaps more so than in families without epilepsy: 79% and 66% of parents, respectively, considered epilepsy contagious; 43% vs. 69% thought that it inevitably led to psychosis; and 53% vs. 29% attributed epilepsy to supernatural causes. Finally, 63% of parents with an affected child reported consulting a traditional healer as first-line management for epilepsy. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates widespread misconceptions in Mali regarding epilepsy. Our findings argue for more education initiatives focused on the entire population, including traditional healers, to provide knowledge, reduce stigma, and improve quality of life for individuals living with epilepsy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".