4.2 Article

Understanding the burden of epilepsy in Latin America: A systematic review of its prevalence and incidence

期刊

EPILEPSY RESEARCH
卷 66, 期 1-3, 页码 63-74

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2005.07.002

关键词

epilepsy; incidence; prevalence; Latin America; systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Epilepsy is the most common serious neurological condition in the world, and an important cause of mortality and disability in developing countries. Because epidemiological and clinical characteristics of epilepsy vary by region, it is important to know the peculiarities of epilepsy in this area of the American continent. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, IMBIOMED, and LILACS (The Latin-American and Caribbean biomedical database) to identify community-based studies reporting on the prevalence and incidence of epilepsy in Latin America. Studies were included if a definition of epilepsy was given, if data were obtained through standardized questionnaires and if raw population numbers were available for data confirmation. Results: Thirty-three studies fulfilled eligibility criteria, 32 reported on prevalence and three on incidence of epilepsy. The median lifetime prevalence in all countries was 17.8 (range 6-43.2) per 1000 people, and the range for incidence was 77.7-190 per 100,000 people per year. There were no differences between rural and urban areas, by gender, age-group (children, adult, all ages), ascertainment method, or year of study. Conclusions: Measuring the global burden of disease in Latin America requires adequate epidemiological information. This systematic review of epidemiological studies identifies higher prevalence and incidence rates of epilepsy in the general population of Latin America than in northern hemisphere countries. The remarkable heterogeneity found between and even within countries, could be explained by several factors, importantly, socioeconomic and methodological aspects. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据