The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of Incidence Studies of Epilepsy and Unprovoked Seizures
Abstract
Summary: Purpose: To evaluate the methodology of incidence studies of epilepsy and unprovoked seizures and to assess the value of their findings by summarizing their results. Methods: A Medline literature search from January 1966 to December 1999 was conducted. In each selected study, key methodologic items such as case definition and study design were evaluated. Furthermore, a quantitative meta‐analysis of the incidence data was performed. Results: Forty incidence studies met the inclusion criteria. There was considerable heterogeneity in study methodology, and the methodologic quality score was generally low. The median incidence rate of epilepsy and unprovoked seizures was 47.4 and 56 per 100,000, respectively. The age‐specific incidence of epilepsy was high in those aged 60 years or older, but was highest in childhood. Males had a slightly higher incidence of epilepsy (median, 50.7/100,000) than did females (median, 46.2/100,000), and partial seizures seemed to occur more often than generalized seizures. Developing countries had a higher incidence rate of epilepsy (median, 68.7/100,000) than did industrialized countries (median, 43.4/100,000). Similar results were found for unprovoked seizures. The incidence of epilepsy over time appears to decrease in children, whereas it increases in the elderly. Conclusions: The age‐specific incidence of epilepsy showed a bimodal distribution with the highest peak in childhood. No definitive conclusions could be reached for the incidence of unprovoked seizures and other specific incidence rates of epilepsy. More incidence studies with an adequate study methodology are needed to explore geographic variations and time trends of the incidence of epilepsy and unprovoked seizures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology<SUBTITLE>A Proposal for Reporting</SUBTITLE>
Stroup, D. F. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.15.2008 · Cited by 20,623
The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis
Jüni, P. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1054 · Cited by 1,981
Cited by
Estimation of the burden of active and life-time epilepsy: a meta-analytic approach
Ngugi, A. K., Bottomley, C., Kleinschmidt, I., Sander, J. W., & Newton, C. R. (2010) · Epilepsia · doi:10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02481.x · Cited by 1,447
The kainic acid models of temporal lobe epilepsy
Rusina, E., Bernard, C., & Williamson, A. (2021) · eneuro · doi:10.1523/eneuro.0337-20.2021 · Cited by 225
Sex and Gender Differences in Central Nervous System-Related Disorders
Zagni, E., Simoni, L., & Colombo, D. (2016) · Neuroscience Journal · doi:10.1155/2016/2827090 · Cited by 173
Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Automated Diagnosis of Neurological Disorders
Raghavendra, U., Acharya, U. R., & Adeli, H. (2019) · European Neurology · doi:10.1159/000504292 · Cited by 174
McLaughlin, D. P., & McFarland, K. (2011) · Journal of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10865-010-9299-z · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Kotsopoulos, I. A. W., Van Merode, T., Kessels, F. G. H., De Krom, M. C. T. F. M., & Knottnerus, J. A.
- Venue
- Epilepsia
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1402-1409
- ISSN
- 0013-9580 (ISSN-L)
- 1528-1167
- OpenAlex
- W1969836710
- Cited by
- 435
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 0.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of Incidence Studies of Epilepsy and Unprovoked Seizures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1528-1157.2002.t01-1-26901.x
- The paper
- Kotsopoulos, I. A. W., Van Merode, T., Kessels, F. G. H., De Krom, M. C. T. F. M., & Knottnerus, J. A. (2002). Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of Incidence Studies of Epilepsy and Unprovoked Seizures. Epilepsia. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1528-1157.2002.t01-1-26901.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.