Paolo Pierino Mazzone

To the Editor On behalf of my coauthors, I write to address some errors identified in our Original Investigation, “Comparison of Perinatal Outcomes for

Importance: Pregnant women who have epilepsy need adequate engagement, information, and pregnancy planning and management to improve pregnancy outcomes.Objective: To investigate perinatal outcomes in women with epilepsy compared with women without epilepsy.Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched with no language or date restrictions (database inception through December 6, 2022). Searches also included OpenGrey and Google Scholar and manual searching in journals and reference lists of included studies.Study Selection: All observational studies comparing women with and without epilepsy were included.Data Extraction and Synthesis: The PRISMA checklist was used for abstracting data and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for risk-of-bias assessment. Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment were done independently by 2 authors with mediation conducted independently by a third author. Pooled unadjusted odds ratios (OR) or mean differences were reported with 95% CI from random-effects (I² heterogeneity statistic >50%) or fixed-effects (I² < 50%) meta-analyses.Main Outcomes and Measures: Maternal, fetal, and neonatal complications.Results: Of 8313 articles identified, 76 were included in the meta-analyses. Women with epilepsy had increased odds of miscarriage (12 articles, 25 478 pregnancies; OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.15-2.29), stillbirth (20 articles, 28 134 229 pregnancies; OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.29-1.47), preterm birth (37 articles, 29 268 866 pregnancies; OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.32-1.51) and maternal death (4 articles, 23 288 083 pregnancies; OR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.38-18.04). Neonates born to women with epilepsy had increased odds of congenital conditions (29 articles, 24 238 334 pregnancies; OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.66-2.12), neonatal intensive care unit admission (8 articles, 1 204 428 pregnancies; OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.58-2.51), and neonatal or infant death (13 articles, 1 426 692 pregnancies; OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.56-2.24). The increased odds of poor outcomes was increased with greater use of antiseizure medication.Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that women with epilepsy have worse perinatal outcomes compared with women without epilepsy. Women with epilepsy should receive pregnancy counseling from an epilepsy specialist who can also optimize their antiseizure medication regimen before and during pregnancy.

To describe and compare vision screening programmes and identify variance in number and type of tests used, timing of screening, personnel involved, monitoring and funding to be used as data for optimising, disinvesting or implementing future screening programmes. A questionnaire consisting of nine domains: demography & epidemiology, administration & general background, existing screening, coverage & attendance, tests, follow-up & diagnosis, treatment, cost & benefit and adverse effects was completed by Country Representatives (CRs) recruited from 47 countries. The questionnaire was sufficiently completed for 46 Countries: 42 European countries, China, India, Malawi and Rwanda. Variation of provision was found in; age of screening (0–17 years), tests included (23), types of visual acuity (VA) test used (35 different optotypes), personnel (13), number of screens per child (median 5, range 1–32), and times VA tested (median 3, range 1–30). Infant screening is offered in all countries, whereas childhood vision screening is offered at least once in all countries, but not all regions of each country. All 46 countries provide vision screening between the ages of 3–7 years. Data on screening outcomes for quality assurance was not available from most countries; complete evaluation data was available in 2% of countries, partial data from 43%. Vision screening is highly variable. Some form of VA testing is being undertaken during childhood. Data collection and sharing should be improved to facilitate comparison and to be able to optimise vision screening programmes between regions and countries.