Cited by 205Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsEpilepsy research and treatmentPain Management and Placebo Effect

Dual diagnosis of epilepsy and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: Systematic review and meta-analysis of frequency, correlates, and outcomes

Open access
Kutlubaev, Mansur A., Xu, Ying, Hackett, Maree L., Stone, Jon·2018·Epilepsy & Behavior

Abstract

Comorbid epilepsy and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES) represent a serious challenge for the clinicians. However, the frequency, associations, and outcomes of dual diagnosis of epilepsy and PNES are unclear. The aim of the review was to determine the frequency, correlates, and outcomes of a dual diagnosis. A systematic review of all published observational studies (from inception to Dec. 2016) was conducted to determine the frequency, correlates, and outcomes of dual diagnosis. We included studies of individuals of any age reporting a dual diagnosis of epilepsy and PNES. All observational study designs were included with the exception of case reports and case series with fewer than 10 participants. The mean frequency of epilepsy in patients with PNES across all studies was 22% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 20 to 25%, range: 0% to 90%) while the mean frequency of PNES in patients with epilepsy was 12% (95% CI 10 to 14%, range: 1% to 62%). High heterogeneity means that these pooled estimates should be viewed with caution. A number of correlates of dual diagnosis were reported. Some studies delineated differences in semiology of seizures in patients with dual diagnosis vs. PNES or epilepsy only. However, most of the correlates were inconclusive. Only a few studies examined outcome in patients with dual diagnosis. Dual diagnosis is common in clinical practice, especially among patients referred to specialized services, and requires careful diagnosis and management.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.yebeh.2018.10.010

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 114 · Cited by 205

Authors
Kutlubaev, M. A., Xu, Y., Hackett, M. L., & Stone, J.
Affiliations
  • Bashkir State Medical University (RU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Kutlubaev, Mansur A.
Venue
Epilepsy & Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-12
Volume
89
Pages
70-78
ISSN
1525-5050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2899138141
Cited by
205
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 9
FWCI
2.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epilepsy & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Epilepsy research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
Keywords
epilepsy, psychogenic non-epileptic seizures, dual diagnosis, comorbidities, seizure semiology, clinical outcomes, diagnosis and management
MeSH terms
Adult, Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, Female, Humans, Male, Psychophysiologic Disorders, Seizures, Comorbidity, Treatment Outcome, Diagnosis, Dual (Psychiatry)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review