MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413851577 · doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2025.110677

A survey of adult caregivers of people with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies: A long-term care planning needs assessment

2025· article· en· W4413851577 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle M. Andrade, Laurie Bailey, Mary Anne Meskis, Veronica Hood, Tracy Dixon‐Salazar, Jennifer Griffin, Μ. Scott Perry

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsy & Behavior · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUCB USUCB
KeywordsEpilepsyLong-term careTerm (time)PsychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Provide the perspective of caregivers planning for adulthood in people with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs). RESULTS: Family members (N = 134) of people with DEE (1-44 years old) responded to an anonymous, internet-based survey to assess the needs of DEE families. Respondents included parents/guardians (n = 121, 90.3 %) and adult siblings ≥18y (n = 13, 9.7 %). Diagnoses included Dravet syndrome (n = 71), Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (n = 38), PCDH19-related epilepsy syndrome (n = 8), CDKL5 deficiency disorder (n = 5), SYNGAP1-related DEE (n = 5), STXBP1-related DEE (n = 3), Dup15q syndrome (n = 2), infantile spasms and NPRL2 seizure disorder (dual diagnosis, n = 1), and Fragile X syndrome (n = 1). Constant safety monitoring was required for many people with DEE (82.1 %). Between 81.3 % and 92.5 % of people with DEE experienced developmental delays, intellectual disability, delayed language and speech issues, and movement and/or balance issues. Overall, 29 (21.6 %) respondents reported having adequate access to long-term adult care planning information. Medical, legal, and financial planning was completed by 22 (18.2 %) to 46 (38.0 %) parent/guardian respondents. Most adult siblings (12/13, 92.3 %) planned to receive responsibility for future care of their sibling with DEE. Respondents accessed relevant information via disease-specific patient organizations (81.3 %), other patients and/or caregivers (67.9 %), social media (53.7 %), primary care physicians (40.3 %), nurses (14.2 %), and neurologists (1.5 %). Respondents indicated concern as the people with DEE transition into adulthood. SIGNIFICANCE: Caregivers of adults with DEE are often family members, including adult siblings. Caregivers/families may benefit from receiving additional support to facilitate future planning of transition to adult care. The healthcare system may require changes to facilitate successful medical transition.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsy & BehaviorSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207