The Burden of Epilepsy in the Developing WorldEpilepsy affects approximately 50 million people worldwide, with 80% of these individuals residing in developing regions. Epilepsy accounts for about 1% of the global burden of disease (1,2). To understand many of the issues inevitably encountered in providing services for a chronic condition in a developing country, some important realities must be appreciated, some of which will be detailed here in Part I.Almost universally, developing countries have marked inequalities in the distribution of health care resources (3). Health care in private, settings of these countries may be relatively equivalent to first-world care, but care for the poor is virtually nonexistent. Inequities in the distribution of public services favoring urban regions are also problematic. For example, South Africa has two parallel health care systems-one public and one private. The private health care system serves approximately Address correspondence to Gretchen L. Birbeck, MD, MPH, DTMH, FAAN, Director-Epilepsy Care Team, Chikankata Hospital, Private Bag S2, Mazabuka, Zambia. E-mail: Gretchen.birbeck@hc.msu.edu 15% of the population, but it accounts for 57% of health care dollars spent. The private system employs 65% of all health care workers and an even greater proportion of specialists; for instance, 75% of neurologists are employed entirely within the private sector. Access to technological aspects of care is also extremely unequally distributed, as 73% of EEG machines, 91% of CT scanners, and 94% of MRIs are owned by the private sector (4). In South Africa, epilepsy care within a top-ranked private urban facility differs a great deal from epilepsy care provision in an urban slum or rural village.Consistent findings from epidemiologic studies of epilepsy in developing countries indicate that both the prevalence and, unfortunately, the treatment gap, defined as the number of individuals with epilepsy who remain untreated with antiepileptic drugs, for epilepsy is typically higher in rural than urban areas of the same country (5-8). For example, reports from Brazil indicate the rural treatment gap is 67% versus 38% in urban areas. The higher treatment gap is understandable since medical infrastructure, resources, and personnel are largely focused in urban regions. Prevalence differentials are less understandable. It is possible that the lack of medical infrastructure results in greater exposure to common risk factors for epilepsy, such as birth injury as a result of suboptimal antenatal care. Alternatively, urban dwellers that develop epilepsy may be sent back to "stay in the village," where lack of formal employment and a broader network of family members may be perceived as being a more optimal environment for caring for someone with recurrent seizures. Thus, it is difficult to assess with certainty the underlying reasons for the higher prevalence rates of epilepsy in rural areas of developing countries.While the treatment gap is a very useful global measure for assessing epilepsy care in ...