SUMMARYPurpose: Underutilization of epilepsy surgery remains a major problem and is in part due to physicians' misconceptions about the risks associated with epilepsy surgery. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature on complications of focal epilepsy surgery. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Embase to identify studies examining epilepsy surgery complications. Abstract and full text review, along with data extraction, was done in duplicate. Minor medical and neurologic complications were defined as those that resolved completely within 3 months of surgery, whereas major complications persisted beyond that time frame. Descriptive statistics were used to report complication proportions.

No abstract

Background Interventions to alleviate stigma are demonstrating effectiveness across a range of conditions, though few move beyond the pilot phase, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Implementation science offers tools to study complex interventions, understand barriers to implementation, and generate evidence of affordability, scalability, and sustainability. Such evidence could be used to convince policy-makers and donors to invest in implementation. However, the utility of implementation research depends on its rigor and replicability. Our objectives were to systematically review implementation studies of health-related stigma reduction interventions in LMICs and critically assess the reporting of implementation outcomes and intervention descriptions. Methods PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EMBASE were searched for evaluations of stigma reduction interventions in LMICs reporting at least one implementation outcome. Study- and intervention-level characteristics were abstracted. The quality of reporting of implementation outcomes was assessed using a five-item rubric, and the comprehensiveness of intervention description and specification was assessed using the 12-item Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). Results A total of 35 eligible studies published between 2003 and 2017 were identified; of these, 20 (57%) used qualitative methods, 32 (91%) were type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies, and 29 (83%) were evaluations of once-off or pilot implementations. No studies adopted a formal theoretical framework for implementation research. Acceptability (20, 57%) and feasibility (14, 40%) were the most frequently reported implementation outcomes. The quality of reporting of implementation outcomes was low. The 35 studies evaluated 29 different interventions, of which 18 (62%) were implemented across sub-Saharan Africa, 20 (69%) focused on stigma related to HIV/AIDS, and 28 (97%) used information or education to reduce stigma. Intervention specification and description was uneven. Conclusion Implementation science could support the dissemination of stigma reduction interventions in LMICs, though usage to date has been limited. Theoretical frameworks and validated measures have not been used, key implementation outcomes like cost and sustainability have rarely been assessed, and intervention processes have not been presented in detail. Adapted frameworks, new measures, and increased LMIC-based implementation research capacity could promote the rigor of future stigma implementation research, helping the field deliver on the promise of stigma reduction interventions worldwide. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12916-018-1237-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Older adults are at greatest risk of severe disease and death due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Globally, persons older than 65 years comprise 9% of the population, 1 yet account for 30% to 40% of cases and more than 80% of deaths. 2 Unfortunately, there is a long history of exclusion of older adults from clinical trials. In response, the National Institutes of Health instituted the Inclusion Across the Lifespan policy, requiring the inclusion of older adults in clinical trials. 3 Thus, we reviewed all COVID-19 treatment and vaccine trials on http:// www.clinicaltrials.gov to evaluate their risk for exclusion of older adults (≥65 years).

No abstract

Single-neuronal studies remain the gold standard for studying brain function. Here we describe a protocol for studying task-related single-neuronal activity in human subjects during neurosurgical procedures involving microelectrode recordings. This protocol has two phases: a preoperative phase and an intraoperative phase. During the preoperative phase, we discuss informed consent, equipment setup and behavioral testing. During the intraoperative phase, we discuss the procedure for microelectrode recordings. Because patients are often awake during these procedures, this protocol can be performed in conjunction with behavioral tasks for studying a variety of cognitive functions. We describe the protocol in detail and provide two examples of expected results. In addition, we discuss the potential difficulties and pitfalls related to intraoperative studies. This protocol takes ∼1.5 h to complete.

The primate brain has the remarkable ability of mapping sensory stimuli into motor behaviors that can lead to positive outcomes. We have previously shown that during the reinforcement of visual-motor behavior, activity in the caudate nucleus is correlated with the rate of learning. Moreover, phasic microstimulation in the caudate during the reinforcement period was shown to enhance associative learning, demonstrating the importance of temporal specificity to manipulate learning related changes. Here we present evidence that extends upon our previous finding by demonstrating that temporally coordinated phasic deep brain stimulation across both the nucleus accumbens and caudate can further enhance associative learning. Monkeys performed a visual-motor associative learning task and received stimulation at time points critical to learning related changes. Resulting performance revealed an enhancement in the rate, ceiling, and reaction times of learning. Stimulation of each brain region alone or at different time points did not generate the same effect.

Objective The use of the Internet for health‐related questions is increasing, but it is not clear whether individuals can understand the information available online. Most health organizations recommend that health educational materials (HEMs) be written below the sixth grade reading level. This study was designed to evaluate the readability level of available online HEMs pertaining to traumatic brain injury (TBI), epilepsy, and posttraumatic epilepsy (PTE). Methods This cross‐sectional readability assessment included HEMs from TBI and epilepsy stakeholder organizations and those obtained from four Internet searches. The search strategy was designed to replicate a nonmedical individual's keyword searches. Each HEM was assessed with an online automated readability tool using three indices (Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook). Findings were compared as a function of organization type (journalistic news or health organization), targeted medical condition (TBI, epilepsy, or PTE), or content topic (patient health education, clinical research education, or both). Results Readability analysis of 405 identified HEMs revealed scores above the sixth grade reading level recommendation. Only 6.2% of individual HEMs met the sixth grade recommendation. Journalistic news organizations’ HEMs had similar readability levels to health organizations’ HEMs. PTE‐related HEMs required the highest readability level, >11th grade (P < .001). There were significant differences in the readability scores (P < .01 for all indices) among HEMs with information on health education, research education, or both topics. The highest required readability level (>12 grade level) was for HEMs that included both health and research education. Significance The majority of TBI‐, epilepsy‐, and PTE‐related online HEMs do not meet the sixth grade reading recommendation. Improving the readability of HEMs may advance health literacy around TBI, epilepsy, and PTE, leading to more effective participant recruitment/retention strategies for future antiepileptogenesis trials in persons with TBI and perhaps better patient‐centered outcomes.