The protocol was developed in conformity with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols Guidelines.[23] We have registered the protocol in PROSPERO (CRD 42022365184).
Patients and public involvement
This study does not involve patients and the public.
Case and control populations
Participants who are diagnosed with epilepsy and cognitive impairment serve as the case group. And populations with epilepsy but do not have cognitive impairment serve as the control group. The definition of epilepsy is two unprovoked seizures occurring more than 24 hours apart; only one unprovoked seizure, but the risk of recurrence is over 60% within the next 10 years; or diagnosed with an epilepsy syndrome.[24] The evaluation of cognitive impairment can be confirmed by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE), and other assessment tools of intelligence, such as language, memory, executive function, motor or processing speed.
Outcome measurements
The outcome indicators include all potential risk factors that are relevant to cognitive impairment in PWE, for example the frequency of seizure, AEDs, as well as disease duration, and so on. We will record all the risk factors mentioned in the included literature, and finally make reasonable screening and evaluation.
Search strategy
Two investigators will independently search all literature that reported risk factors of cognitive impairment in PWE from the following digital databases from inception to October 1, 2022: China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, China Biology Medicine disc, the Chinese clinical trial registry, Wan Fang database, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and Web of Science, without language and country limitations. The detailed search strategies for the Medline database are shown in Table 1, and they can be appropriately adjusted according to other databases’ requirements. Additionally, we will check the references of the included studies to find any related literature. We will contact the original author, if can not access the full text. Any disagreements will be solved through discussion by a third author. The software NoteExpress v3.2 will be used to manage all retrieved literature.
Table 1 The search strategies for the Medline database
Number
|
Searches
|
#1
|
"Epilepsy"[MeSH Terms]
|
#2
|
"Epilepsies"[Title/Abstract] OR "seizure disorder"[Title/Abstract] OR "seizure disorders"[Title/Abstract] OR "awakening epilepsy"[Title/Abstract] OR "epilepsy awakening"[Title/Abstract] OR "epilepsy cryptogenic"[Title/Abstract] OR "cryptogenic epilepsies"[Title/Abstract] OR "cryptogenic epilepsy"[Title/Abstract] OR "epilepsies cryptogenic"[Title/Abstract] OR "Aura"[Title/Abstract] OR "Auras"[Title/Abstract] OR "Seizures"[Title/Abstract] OR "epilepsies partial"[Title/Abstract] OR "epileptic syndromes"[Title/Abstract]
|
#3
|
#1 OR #2
|
#4
|
"Cognition Disorders"[MeSH Terms]
|
#5
|
"disorder cognition"[Title/Abstract] OR "disorders cognition"[Title/Abstract]
|
#6
|
#4 OR #5
|
#7
|
"Cognitive Dysfunction"[MeSH Terms]
|
#8
|
"cognitive dysfunctions"[Title/Abstract] OR "dysfunction cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "dysfunctions cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "cognitive impairments"[Title/Abstract] OR "cognitive impairment"[Title/Abstract] OR "impairment cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "impairments cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "mild cognitive impairment"[Title/Abstract] OR "cognitive impairment mild"[Title/Abstract] OR "cognitive impairments mild"[Title/Abstract] OR "impairment mild cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "impairments mild cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "mild cognitive impairments"[Title/Abstract] OR "mild neurocognitive disorder"[Title/Abstract] OR "disorder mild neurocognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "disorders mild neurocognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "mild neurocognitive disorders"[Title/Abstract] OR "neurocognitive disorder mild"[Title/Abstract] OR "neurocognitive disorders mild"[Title/Abstract] OR "cognitive decline"[Title/Abstract] OR "cognitive declines"[Title/Abstract] OR "decline cognitive"[Title/Abstract] OR "Mental Deterioration"[Title/Abstract] OR "Deterioration, Mental"[Title/Abstract]
|
#9
|
#7 OR #8
|
#10
|
"risk factor"[Title/Abstract] OR "association"[Title/Abstract] OR "relative risk"[Title/Abstract] OR "OR"[Title/Abstract]
|
#11
|
#6 OR #9
|
#12
|
#3 AND #10 AND #11
|
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1) The types of included articles are prospective, retrospective cohort study, and case-control study; 2) All participants must be diagnosed with epilepsy, and participants in case group must be accompanied by cognitive impairment regardless of age, gender, region, and severity level; 3) Exposure factors are the risk factors associated with cognitive impairment in PWE.
Exclusion criteria: 1) The sample size of the study is less than 50 cases; 2) Literature reviews, conference abstracts, guidelines, case reports, animal experiments, and duplicate publications will be excluded; 3) Full text or complete data cannot be obtained.
Study selection
Two authors will screen all retrieved articles according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The duplicated studies will be removed by the software NoteExpress. Then they will select eligible literature by reading abstracts and titles or full-text when necessary. The disagreements in this process will be solved via consultation with a third author. The procedure for selecting articles is shown in Figure 1.
Data extraction
Two researchers will independently extract data from each eligible study. The detailed information is as follows: first authors’ surname, time of publication, study sample size, participants’ age and gender, study population type, seizure type, disease duration, and related risk factors. If any data is missing, we will contact the original author.
Assessment of bias risk
Two investigators will independently evaluate the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). This scale is categorized into three domains of selection, comparability and outcome (cohort studies) or exposure (case-control studies). Each item will be assessed via the assignment of the star.[25] Any controversial issues can be solved by a discussion with a third author.
Data synthesis
The included risk factors must be analyzed by multiple-factor logistic regression. And they must be reported by more than three articles to ensure that a meta-analysis can be conducted. Otherwise, these articles will be analyzed by systematic review. Additionally, the raw data require to provide the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We will use the software Revman 5.4 and Stata 15.1 to analyze all statistical data. The OR will be calculated for each risk factor, and the confidence interval (CI) is 95%. Heterogeneity between the studies will be assessed through the Q statistic and I2 index. When I²≤50%, it indicates that the heterogeneity is not obvious, and we can adopt a fixed-effects model to estimate all pooled results. Otherwise, the random-effects model will be used. The subgroup analysis will be conducted based on the type of epilepsy and study population type. Except for that, we will undertake sensitivity analysis to assess the influence of a single study on the pooled effect size by removing one study each time. Meta-regression analysis will be performed to test the source of heterogeneity when the number of studies is over 10 in meta-analysis. The publication bias between studies will be evaluated by visual inspection funnel plot and quantitative detection Egger’s test when over 10 studies are included in the meta-analysis. P value > 0.05 indicates that the publication bias is not significant. If the data is ambiguous or missing, we will contact the original author by email for more information.
Assessment of evidence quality
The quality of evidence will be assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) toll based on five domains: risk of bias, consistency, directness, precision, and publication bias (https://www.gradepro.org/). Quality assessment result is rated as high, moderate, low, or very low.[26] Two independent authors will participate in this assessment and reach a consensus by discussion to guide the strength of the evidence.