Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2023 Jul 7;18(7):e0288120. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288120

How do smoking, vaping, and nicotine affect people with epilepsy and seizures? A scoping review protocol

Jackson A Narrett 1, Waleed Khan 2, Melissa C Funaro 3, Jeremy J Moeller 1,*
Editor: Sathish Rajaa4
PMCID: PMC10328254  PMID: 37418386

Abstract

Background

Epilepsy is a prevalent disease that requires personalized care to control seizures, reduce side effects, and ameliorate the burden of comorbidities. Smoking is a major cause of preventable death and disease. There is evidence that patients with epilepsy smoke at high rates and that smoking may increase seizure frequency. However, there is a lack systematically synthesized evidence on the interactions between epilepsy and seizures and smoking, tobacco use, vaping, and smoking cessation.

Methods and analysis

This scoping review protocol guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews will investigate what is known about the interactions between smoking and epilepsy. This review will include the population of persons with all types of epilepsy or seizures and examine an inclusive list of concepts including tobacco use, vaping, nicotine replacement, and smoking cessation. The MEDLINE, Embase, APA Psycinfo, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases will be searched. Following systematic screening of records, data will be charted, synthesized, and summarized for presentation and publication.

Ethics and dissemination

No ethical approval is required for this literature-based study. The results of this scoping review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. This synthesis will be informative to clinicians and direct further research that may improve health outcomes for people with epilepsy.

Registration

This protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D3ZK8).

Introduction/Rationale

There are an estimated 50 million people living with epilepsy worldwide [1]. People with epilepsy are at risk for reductions in quality of life and well-being not only due to increases in seizure frequency but also due to neuropsychological and medical comorbidities [2, 3]. A comprehensive approach to epilepsy management requires an individualized approach to seizure control, minimization of side effects from medications and surgery, and optimization of comorbidities and lifestyle [3, 4].

Cigarette smoking is a leading cause of preventable death [5]. In the United States, some demographic groups use tobacco at increased rates [6]. There is evidence that people with epilepsy may experience such a disparity [79]. Specifically, while rates of smoking declined amongst all adults in the United States between 2010 and 2017, such a decline was not seen in people with epilepsy, with as many as 25% of people with epilepsy in the United States actively smoking in 2017 [9]. Cigarette smoking may be associated with an increased risk of seizures in patients with epilepsy [10]. Furthermore, smoking is known to contribute to various medical comorbidities that people with epilepsy experience increased risk for, such as reduced bone density and cardiovascular disease [11, 12]. Therefore, people with epilepsy who smoke are at risk for both seizure related, and non-seizure related poor health outcomes. Some evidence also suggests that people who smoke may be at an increased risk of developing epilepsy [13].

Nicotine, the primary addictive chemical in tobacco smoke, has been shown to have a proconvulsive effect in animal models. This effect is attributed to the activation of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nACHRs) in the brain [14]. Animal models with mutant nACHR subunits with slower desensitization have increased sensitivity to nicotine induced seizures [14]. Likewise, animals with deficiency in subunits that increase the receptors’ function have been shown to have decreased sensitivity to nicotine induced seizures. While the precise cellular and network mechanisms that underly nicotine induced seizures are not fully elucidated, the cholinergic nuclei in the brainstem and basal forebrain play key roles in arousal and attention via their effects on cortical tone and modulation of such systems could therefore theoretically affect the seizure threshold. Additionally, nicotine at subconvulsive doses given chronically has been demonstrated to have a seizure kindling effect in animal models [14].

Nicotine may however have anticonvulsant effects in certain contexts. Autosomal Dominant Sleep Related Hypermotor Epilepsy (ADHSE, previously Autosomal Dominant Nocturnal Frontal Lobe Epilepsy) is a rare inherited focal onset epilepsy syndrome associated with mutations in genes that encode the subunits of nACHRs [15]. In vitro expression of such mutant receptors has shown an increased sensitivity to ligands [16]. Interestingly, nicotine may improve seizure control in people with ADSHE due to either receptor desensitization that results from chronic exposure or an alteration of the polymerization of nACHRs to favor stoichiometry with lower ligand affinity [15].

Both the proconvulsant and anticonvulsant effects of nicotine described above have been demonstrated clinically. Seizures have been reported in cases of nicotine poisoning from nicotine patches reported to poison control centers [17]. Seizures have also been reported following exposure to vaped nicotine, or nicotine containing fluids to be used in vaping devices [1820]. In small clinical studies of patients with ADSHE, nicotine therapy has demonstrated antiseizure effects [21, 22].

The effect of tobacco smoke on the seizure threshold may be due to the effects of nicotine described above, or because of other chemical compounds. For example, tobacco smoke contains chemicals such as arsenic, ammonia, and acetone that have been shown to induce seizures under certain conditions in animal studies [23]. Furthermore, tobacco smoke has been demonstrated to alter the metabolism of various compounds metabolized by the cytochrome P450 and UDP-glucuronyl transferase systems [24, 25]. Affected compounds could include medications or substances that lower the seizure threshold and antiseizure medications. For example, smoking has been shown to reduce serum levels of lamotrigine [26].

Clinicians who care for people with epilepsy and seizures have a unique opportunity to positively impact the health of their patients by employing a holistic approach to neurologic care informed by an understanding of the interactions of epilepsy with lifestyle factors including smoking. Choice of epilepsy directed therapy such as antiseizure medication or surgery should be tailored to an individual patient’s comorbidities, risk factors, and preferences. Moreover, smoking cessation pharmacotherapy must be considered carefully in patients with epilepsy as bupropion is contraindicated and varenicline is recommended for cautious use in patients at risk for seizures [27]. Currently, the interactions between smoking, nicotine, or vaping and epilepsy or seizures are not well understood and practicing clinicians lack evidence-based guidance to address these issues. To synthesize the evidence on this topic, define gaps in knowledge, and assess opportunities for further research in this area, we aim to conduct a scoping review.

Study objectives

The objective of this scoping review is to systematically scope the existing research on the interaction of tobacco and related products and epilepsy. This review is directed towards the following questions:

  1. What is the prevalence of tobacco use among people with epilepsy?

  2. Does tobacco use/smoking affect seizure control in patients with epilepsy?

  3. Does tobacco use, smoking, or vaping (e-cigarette use) increase an individual’s risk of developing epilepsy?

  4. What is known about vaping and seizures or epilepsy?

  5. What is known about smoking cessation in the epilepsy population?

  6. Do antiseizure medications interact with nicotine, smoking, or vaping?

We will identify the quantity and heterogeneity of studies investigating the above questions, summarize the results of these studies, and identify gaps in knowledge. This study aims to be informative to practicing clinicians caring for patients with epilepsy and researchers designing future studies to elucidate interactions between epilepsy and tobacco use.

Methods and analysis

This scoping review protocol is guided by the framework described by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) [28] and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation [29]. The PRISMA-ScR checklist with protocol relevant sections completed is included here as a S1 Checklist. These resources will be referenced throughout study execution and reporting. This protocol is registered with the Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D3ZK8)

Stage 1: Identifying the question

Research questions were identified through nonsystematic review of literature published on this topic and through discussion between authors. The relevant questions are listed in the study objectives section of this protocol. These questions may be revised, amended, or potentially replaced during an iterative review process.

Stage 2: Identifying relevant studies

The Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework is recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute for scoping reviews and will be used to inform our inclusion criteria [28] (Table 1). We will include peer reviewed articles of all types, book chapters, abstracts, and publications from the grey literature on this topic. Animal studies and non-human laboratory investigations will be excluded. We will include studies published from all years included in the relevant databases. Studies without an available English language article will be excluded. Studies that involve cannabis or cannabinoids will be excluded. We will update relevant concepts through an iterative process during screening.

Table 1. The Population-Concept-Context framework for this scoping review protocol.

P—Population Persons of all ages with epilepsy (Including all types)
C—Concept Cigarette smoking, tobacco use, vaping and electronic cigarette use, nicotine replacement, smoking cessation.
Potential outcomes include prevalence of product use, seizure frequency, prevalence of refractory epilepsy, incidence of seizure, incidence or prevalence of epilepsy diagnosis, incidence of SUDEP, cessation rate, serum antiseizure medicine levels.
C—Context Studies that investigate this topic in any clinical or community context will be included. Records from any country will be included in our review. Records must have an available English language article to be included for data extraction.

We have elected to include studies that examine the interaction between smoking and epilepsy or seizures in both adult and pediatric samples. While this could decrease the internal validity of our synthesis, for the purpose of this scoping review, we prioritize capture of extant knowledge in this field. Our preliminary search described in Step 1 of Table 2 demonstrated that significant contributions to our understanding of the interactions of smoking, nicotine, and tobacco with seizures and epilepsy come from the pediatric population. This includes data on toxic exposures in nicotine, vaping and seizures, and experimental studies of nicotine as an antiseizure medication [20, 22, 30]. Our preliminary search also demonstrated that the literature on any specific type of epilepsy or tobacco/nicotine use pattern is limited. To scope what is known about these topics in an inclusive review that may inform further research, we plan to use a comprehensive list of concepts in our inclusion criteria.

Table 2. The three-step search process to be used in this scoping review.

Step 1 A preliminary search for background information and previously conducted systematic or scoping reviews related to this topic was conducted prior to protocol design by searching PubMed.
Step 2 Searches will be conducted using our final identified search string in the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, APA Psycinfo, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. No date or language limits will be imposed on the search.
The following search terms will be included:
Smoking
Electronic cigarette
Vaping
Nicotine
Tobacco
Epilepsy
Seizure
Convulsions
Anticonvulsive
Antiseizure
Antiepileptic
Step 3 We will identify additional studies using a focused and systematic search of cited studies in articles selected for inclusion using the citationchaser software program [https://estech.shinyapps.io/citationchaser/].
We will limit inclusion of the grey literature to conference abstracts and registered clinical trials.

Search strategy

We will use a three-step search process to identify records to include in this scoping review as recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute [28] (Table 2).

An experienced medical librarian (MCF) was consulted on review methodology and search technique. A medical subject heading (MeSH) analysis of known key articles provided by the research team [mesh.med.yale.edu] was done and scoping searches were conducted in each database. An iterative process was used to translate and refine the searches. To maximize sensitivity, the formal search will use controlled vocabulary terms and synonymous free-text words to capture the concepts of “tobacco smoking” and “epilepsy”. We will include search terms to capture studies on specific tobacco products utilized in various geographical settings to be as inclusive as possible. The search strategy was peer reviewed by a second librarian, not otherwise associated with the project, using the PRESS standard [31]. An example OVID MEDLINE search strategy is included in Fig 1. During the data extraction process, reviewers will check for additional relevant cited and citing articles using included studies. To capture recently published articles, a second database search will be rerun before publishing the paper.

Fig 1. Example OVID MEDLINE search strategy for this scoping review.

Fig 1

Stage 3: Study selection

Search results will be pooled in EndNote 20 and de-duplicated [www.endnote.com]. This set will be uploaded to Covidence [www.covidence.org] for screening. Three authors (JAN, WK, JJM) will independently screen titles and abstracts and subsequently full text records using the prespecified inclusion criteria outlined in Table 1 of this protocol. Conflicting decisions from both title and abstract and full text screening processes will be resolved by unanimous consensus of the three screening authors.

Stage 4: Charting the data

Three authors (JAN, WK, JJM) will participate in the data extraction process. A shared form will be generated for the purposes of data extraction. This form will include the following data fields: year of publication, study design, sample size, intervention or comparator, primary outcome measure, secondary outcome measure, primary result, secondary result. This form will be updated by the authors through an iterative process to ensure capture of relevant data. Additional fields will be added to facilitate capturing the scope of the published data. Following publication of our results, raw data tables will either be uploaded with the publication or maintained by the corresponding author to be available upon request.

Stage 5: Collating, summarizing, and reporting the results

The PRISMA-ScR extension will inform the reporting and discussion of the results of this review [28]. A PRISMA diagram will be generated to summarize the search, screening, and study identification procedure [29].

The data will be summarized in a tabular format to clearly present the relevant details of the studies reviewed. A bubble plot will be used to depict the number of studies published per year in various categories including but not limited to epidemiology, seizure risk, cigarettes, vaping, nicotine replacement, smoking cessation, and medication–tobacco/nicotine interaction. Additional tables and figures will be added to clearly present the results of this review.

A detailed text synthesis of the findings of the included studies will be composed as the results section of a manuscript describing this scoping review. This synthesis will be guided by the research questions included in the study objectives section of this protocol.

Critical appraisal of study quality will be conducted with tools recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute [32]. The relevant JBI checklist will be completed for each included study. A synthesis of the critical appraisal of included studies will be described in the results section of our manuscript.

Our manuscript will include a discussion section that will summarize the results of our review, highlight important and or surprising results, discuss additional research questions identified, describe the limitations of this review, and comment on the quality of the evidence identified.

Stage 6: Consultation

Prior to reporting the results of this scoping review of the literature we will share our manuscript, tables, and materials with expert epileptologists. We will collect feedback to improve our reporting and summary of the results of our scoping review. We do not plan to conduct community or focus group consultation prior to publishing the results of this scoping review.

Ethics and dissemination

No ethical approval was required for this study.

The synthesized results of this scoping review will be detailed in a manuscript and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Conference abstracts may be submitted detailing the procedures described in this report and the results of this study prior to submission for publication.

Discussion

This scoping review will identify the scope of what is known about the interactions between smoking and epilepsy. A strength of our protocol is an inclusive search strategy to capture the spectrum of this topic by including various forms of tobacco use, vaping, nicotine replacement, and smoking cessation. A limitation of this study is the choice to limit the review to human studies only. This will exclude data from animal studies on the science of tobacco and epilepsy. We believe that this choice is appropriate to generate a clinically relevant review. Our scoping review aims to be useful to clinicians who care for patients with epilepsy and to inform the design of further research studies to investigate this topic. An improved understanding of the interaction of smoking and epilepsy may lead to better outcomes for patients with epilepsy who experience the comorbidity of tobacco use through informed personalized epilepsy treatment and smoking cessations strategies.

Supporting information

S1 Checklist. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

(DOCX)

Data Availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. All relevant data from this study will be made available upon study completion.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Singh G, Sander JW. The global burden of epilepsy report: Implications for low- and middle-income countries. Epilepsy Behav. 2020. Apr;105:106949. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.106949 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Keezer MR, Sisodiya SM, Sander JW. Comorbidities of epilepsy: current concepts and future perspectives. The Lancet Neurology. 2016. Jan 1;15(1):106–15. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00225-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kanner AM. Management of psychiatric and neurological comorbidities in epilepsy. Nat Rev Neurol. 2016. Feb;12(2):106–16. doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.243 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Noe K. Counseling and Management of the Risks of Living With Epilepsy. CONTINUUM: Lifelong Learning in Neurology. 2019. Apr;25(2):477. doi: 10.1212/CON.0000000000000708 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.United States Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Smoking– 50 Years of progress: A Report of the Surgeon General: (510072014–001) [Internet]. American Psychological Association; 2014 [cited 2022 Sep 4]. http://doi.apa.org/get-pe-doi.cfm?doi=10.1037/e510072014-001
  • 6.Wang TW. Tobacco Product Use Among Adults—United States, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep [Internet]. 2018. [cited 2022 Sep 4];67. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6744a2.htm [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Elliott JO, Lu B, Moore JL, McAuley JW, Long L. Exercise, diet, health behaviors, and risk factors among persons with epilepsy based on the California Health Interview Survey, 2005. Epilepsy & Behavior. 2008. Aug;13(2):307–15. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2008.04.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Elliott JO, Moore JL, Lu B. Health status and behavioral risk factors among persons with epilepsy in Ohio based on the 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Epilepsy & Behavior. 2008. Apr;12(3):434–44. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2007.12.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sapkota S, Kobau R, Croft JB, King BA, Thomas C, Zack MM. Prevalence and Trends in Cigarette Smoking Among Adults with Epilepsy—United States, 2010–2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020. Nov 27;69(47):1792–6. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6947a5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Johnson AL, McLeish AC, Shear PK, Sheth A, Privitera M. The role of cigarette smoking in epilepsy severity and epilepsy-related quality of life. Epilepsy & Behavior. 2019. Apr;93:38–42. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2019.01.041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.S Ahmad B, Hill KD, O’Brien TJ, Gorelik A, Habib N, Wark JD. Falls and fractures in patients chronically treated with antiepileptic drugs. Neurology. 2012. Jul 10;79(2):145–51. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31825f0466 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Josephson CB, Wiebe S, Delgado-Garcia G, Gonzalez-Izquierdo A, Denaxas S, Sajobi TT, et al. Association of Enzyme-Inducing Antiseizure Drug Use With Long-term Cardiovascular Disease. JAMA Neurology. 2021. Nov 1;78(11):1367–74. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.3424 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Dworetzky BA, Bromfield EB, Townsend MK, Kang JH. A prospective study of smoking, caffeine, and alcohol as risk factors for seizures or epilepsy in young adult women: Data from the Nurses’ Health Study II. Epilepsia. 2010;51:198–205. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02268.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Becchetti A, Grandi LC, Cerina M, Amadeo A. Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and epilepsy. Pharmacological Research. 2023;189:106698. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2023.106698 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Becchetti A, Aracri P, Meneghini S, Brusco S, Amadeo A. The role of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in autosomal dominant nocturnal frontal lobe epilepsy. Frontiers in Physiology [online serial]. 2015;6. Accessed at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2015.00022. Accessed March 20, 2023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Nichols WA, Henderson BJ, Marotta CB, et al. Mutation Linked to Autosomal Dominant Nocturnal Frontal Lobe Epilepsy Reduces Low-Sensitivity α4β2, and Increases α5α4β2, Nicotinic Receptor Surface Expression. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0158032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Woolf A, Burkhart K, Caraccio T, Litovitz T. Self-Poisoning Among Adults Using Multiple Transdermal Nicotine Patches. Journal of Toxicology: Clinical Toxicology. 1996. Jan 1;34(6):691–8. doi: 10.3109/15563659609013830 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tatum PS, Oster JM. Seizures and Vaping—A Report of Two Cases. Military Medicine. Epub 2021 Jul 17.:usab270. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usab270 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Faulcon LM, Rudy S, Limpert J, Wang B, Murphy I. Adverse Experience Reports of Seizures in Youth and Young Adult Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems Users. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2020;66:15–17. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.10.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Eggleston W, Nacca N, Stork CM, Marraffa JM. Pediatric death after unintentional exposure to liquid nicotine for an electronic cigarette. Clinical Toxicology. 2016;54:890–891. doi: 10.1080/15563650.2016.1207081 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Fox J, Thodeson DM, Dolce AM. Nicotine: A Targeted Therapy for Epilepsy Due to nAChR Gene Variants. J Child Neurol. SAGE Publications Inc; 2021;36:371–377. doi: 10.1177/0883073820974851 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lossius K, de Saint Martin A, Myren-Svelstad S, et al. Remarkable effect of transdermal nicotine in children with CHRNA4-related autosomal dominant sleep-related hypermotor epilepsy. Epilepsy & Behavior. 2020;105:106944. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.106944 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Rong L, Frontera AT, Benbadis SR. Tobacco smoking, epilepsy, and seizures. Epilepsy & Behavior. 2014. Feb;31:210–8. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2013.11.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wagner E, McMahon L, Falkai P, Hasan A, Siskind D. Impact of smoking behavior on clozapine blood levels–a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2020;142:456–466. doi: 10.1111/acps.13228 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Bock KW, Wiltfang J, Blume R, Ullrich D, Bircher J. Paracetamol as a test drug to determine glucuronide formation in man. Effects of inducers and of smoking. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1987;31:677–683. doi: 10.1007/BF00541295 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Reinsberger C, Dorn T, Krämer G. Smoking reduces serum levels of lamotrigine. Seizure. 2008;17:651–653. doi: 10.1016/j.seizure.2008.05.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Selby P, Zawertailo L. Tobacco Addiction. New England Journal of Medicine. 2022. Jul 28;387(4):345–54. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp2032393 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco AC, Khalil H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI, 2020. https://synthesismanual.jbi.global. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018,169(7):467–473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Wharton JD, Kozek LK, Carson RP. Increased Seizure Frequency Temporally Related to Vaping: Where There’s Vapor, There’s Seizures? Pediatric Neurology. 2020;104:66–67. doi: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2019.10.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016. Jul;75:40–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Critical appraisal tools [Internet]. JBI. [cited 2022Sep26]. https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools

Decision Letter 0

Sathish Rajaa

14 Mar 2023

PONE-D-22-27041What is known about Tobacco Use, Smoking, Vaping, and Epilepsy? A Scoping Review ProtocolPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Narrett,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 27 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sathish Rajaa

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

The authors attempts on generating evidence on the pattern smoking, vaping and other tobacco use among patients with seizures is appreciated, however there are a few clarifications that are needed from our side:

General concerns:

1. The author need to revisit the writeup, and consider expanding the abbreviations

Title:

1. The title appears very vague, the objectives and the research question is not reflected in the topic. Consider providing a more specific topic

Introduction:

1. The introduction is very non specific, the biochemical and social explanation for studying the effect of smoking, vaping and other tobacco use among patients with seizures needs to be elaborated.

2. Consider adding more literature that reports a biochemical explanation for studying the pattern and prevalence of tobacco and other related products among seizure patients

Methods:

The scoping review confines to the PRISMA with ScR extension,

However we need clarification on the following:

1. Please provide more clarification on the study population, why to include children? when the objective is to see the pattern of tobacco and smoking?

2. Elaborate more on the eligibility criteria (e.g., years considered, language, and publication status), and provide a rationale

3. How are you planning to handle the huge grey literature?

4. Provide a still more comprehensive search strategy.

5. Why no efforts are made to access the quality of included studies using a more accepted tool like the CASP checklist?

6. Including all types of epilepsies and investigating on all patterns of tobacco use including all possible literature sources? kindly provide a rational for including all epilepsy types and tobacco use patterns? why not focus on a specific type?

7. Expand 'Tobacco products' in the search strategy thereby the authors don't miss out on any of the types that are available?

8. How are you planning to discuss the results? are any frameworks are planned to be used? if so do mention the framework that is planned to be adopted

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions?

The research question outlined is expected to address a valid academic problem or topic and contribute to the base of knowledge in the field.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses?

The manuscript should describe the methods in sufficient detail to prevent undisclosed flexibility in the experimental procedure or analysis pipeline, including sufficient outcome-neutral conditions (e.g. necessary controls, absence of floor or ceiling effects) to test the proposed hypotheses and a statistical power analysis where applicable. As there may be aspects of the methodology and analysis which can only be refined once the work is undertaken, authors should outline potential assumptions and explicitly describe what aspects of the proposed analyses, if any, are exploratory.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable?

Descriptions of methods and materials in the protocol should be reported in sufficient detail for another researcher to reproduce all experiments and analyses. The protocol should describe the appropriate controls, sample size calculations, and replication needed to ensure that the data are robust and reproducible.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics.

You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study.

(Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I do value the importance of smoking in epilepsy pathogenesis and pharmacotherapy and would like the authors to add another question: the impact of passive smoking during pregnancy on thr incidence of epilepsy development in offsprings via retrospective evaluation.

Reviewer #2: The scoping review protocol was prepared according to the standardized method stipulated by JBIM. The review objectives are all clear and well defined. Just one suggestion, if the keyword for Tobacco should expand: 'Tobacco products' to ensure that the authors won't miss any kind of specific tobacco products that used in other studies from local settings such as kretek, Shisha, Bidis. The rest is all good and clearly written.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Mohamed Mostafa

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Jul 7;18(7):e0288120. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288120.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


11 May 2023

1. The title appears very vague, the objectives and the research question is not reflected in the topic. Consider providing a more specific topic

We thank the editor for this helpful comment. We have rewritten our title to more specifically describe our topic of investigation.

We have changed our title to: "How do smoking, vaping, and nicotine affect people with epilepsy and seizures? A scoping review protocol"

1. The introduction is very non specific, the biochemical and social explanation for studying the effect of smoking, vaping and other tobacco use among patients with seizures needs to be elaborated.

We thank the editor for this helpful comment. We agree that our manuscript could benefit from further explanation of our study's rationale.

We have added content to the introduction to describe the biochemical rationale for studying the effects of smoking, vaping, and tobacco use among patients with epilepsy or seizures. To the second paragraph of the introduction, we have added two sentences. One stating the relevance of our topic to the health outcomes of people with epilepsy. The other comments on evidence suggesting that people who smoke may be at risk for developing epilepsy. We have added three paragraphs to the introduction section that describe the biochemical basis for the proconvulsive effects of nicotine, a possible role of nicotine as an anticonvulsant, and potential effects of the unique exposure of tobacco smoke on the seizure threshold. We have also modified a paragraph that discusses the clinical relevance of the basic science findings described in our introduction. We have made some additional small edits to wording and phrasing in the introduction to clarify the aims of our study.

2. Consider adding more literature that reports a biochemical explanation for studying the pattern and prevalence of tobacco and other related products among seizure patients

We thank the editor for this helpful comment. Our preliminary searches on this topic did not reveal studies reporting data on a biochemical cause of increased smoking rates in people with epilepsy or seizure. Our rationale for studying this topic is related to the epidemiologic data suggesting that people with epilepsy may smoke with increased rates. This could be hypothesized to be either due to effects of having epilepsy such as increased rates of comorbid mental illness, social factors such as lower socioeconomic status, or due a shared diathesis for addictive behavior and seizures due to the behavior of pathological neural networks in the brain. We believe that this is an open question and we hope that our systematic approach to scoping the relevant literature may reveal further studies that comment on this question. For now, we will further describe the epidemiologic finding that serves as our rationale for our study. If we find additional studies supporting increased rates of smoking in people with epilepsy, particularly from different geographical reasons, we will describe this trend and any relevant data on the hypotheses mentioned above in the results and discussion sections of the manuscript that will report this study.

We have added two sentences to the second paragraph of the introduction/rationale section describing tends of smoking rates amongst people with epilepsy in the United States.

1. Please provide more clarification on the study population, why to include children? when the objective is to see the pattern of tobacco and smoking?

We thank the editor for this helpful comment. Our aim is to be as inclusive as possible to systematically scope the published literature on smoking, vaping, tobacco, nicotine use, and epilepsy or seizures. We do appreciate that inclusion of both adult and pediatric patients introduces a heterogeneity to our study. However, we believe that including pediatric studies is additive. Prelimary search identified additive studies pediatric population, including data on seizures provoked by nicotine and on treatment of ADSHE. We believe that conducting a broad scoping review will be most useful to framing what is known on our topic of interest and informing further research.

We have added a paragraph describing our rationale for including both adult and pediatric patients to our section "Stage 2: Identifying relevant studies"

2. Elaborate more on the eligibility criteria (e.g., years considered, language, and publication status), and provide a rationale

We will include studies from all years available in the individual databases (this might be different for each one). We will include English Language studies. Our first paragraph of the stage 2 section described publication status to be included.

We have added "Studies without an available English language article will be excluded." To the text of our identifying relevant studies section. "Records must have an available English language article to be included for data extraction." is also included in the "Context" section of our Population-Concept-Context Table (table 1). We have added a sentence to the first paragraph of the stage 2 section stating that we will include studies from all years included in relevant databases.

3. How are you planning to handle the huge grey literature?

Thank you for this helpful comment. We have revised our plan for the grey literature. We will limit inclusion of grey literature to the conference abstracts and clinical trial protocols identified by our search strategy. We believe that this approach is reasonable and that our inclusive scoping review of the academic literature will identify what is known on our topic of interest.

We have added a sentence to step 3 of table two stating how we will limit the our inclusion of the grey literature on this topic.

4. Provide a still more comprehensive search strategy.

Thank you for this comment. We have included a three step description of our search strategy in table 2. We describe our formal search of the literature in the search strategy section of our paper. We include an OVID MEDLINE example search strategy. We believe that our search could be replicated by a medical librarian with appropriate training and experience. In order improve our communication of the search strategy, we will move the MEDLINE search strategy from Appendix 1 to Figure 1 in the body of the manuscript.

We have moved the MEDLINE search strategy from Appendix 1 to Figure 1.

5. Why no efforts are made to access the quality of included studies using a more accepted tool like the CASP checklist?

Thank you for this helpful comment. Our original plan was to use the JBI checklists only if 5 or more studies of a single type were identified. We recognize that our review will be improved by systematic critical appraisal and we will now plan to use the JBI checklists for every article identified. In making this decision we reviewed both of CASP checklists and JBI checklists. While both are excellent tools, we are opting to use the JBI checklists as they include only multiple choice fields without free text. This will improve our ability to synthesize this data in a table or figure.

We have edited a sentence in the third paragraph of our Stage 5 section of the manuscript describing our plan.

6. Including all types of epilepsies and investigating on all patterns of tobacco use including all possible literature sources? kindly provide a rational for including all epilepsy types and tobacco use patterns? why not focus on a specific type?

Thank you for this helpful comment. Our review aims to systematically scope what is known about the effects of tobacco use, vaping, and nicotine related to seizures and epilepsy. Our preliminary search, described in step 1 of our search process table (table 2), demonstrated that the literature on this topic is highly heterogeneous and data on any given type of epilepsy or tobacco use pattern would be limited. By conducting an inclusive review, we believe we can better define the landscape of what is known on these topics. This scoping review may identify areas that could benefit from subsequent systematic review and/or metanalysis

We have added a sentence to the second paragraph of the Stage 2 section of our manuscript describing our rationale for including all epilepsy types and tobacco use patterns.

7. Expand 'Tobacco products' in the search strategy thereby the authors don't miss out on any of the types that are available?

Thank you for this helpful comment. We agree that this would improve our search strategy.

We have added a sentence to the second paragraph of our search strategy section describing this change. We have updated Figure 1 to include these terms in our search.

8. How are you planning to discuss the results? are any frameworks are planned to be used? if so do mention the framework that is planned to be adopted

Thank you for this helpful comment. Our review will include a discussion section. We will discuss the result of our review within the context of related research in the field of epilepsy. We will highlight important or surprising findings from our results. We will discuss additional research questions identified by our review. We will also discuss the limitations of our review and comment on the quality of evidence identified. This discussion will be informed by the PRISMA-ScR checklist.

We have added to the text of the Stage 5 section "Our manuscript will include a discussion section that will highlight important and or surprising results from this review, discuss additional research questions identified, discuss the limitations of this review, and comment on the quality of the evidence identified." We have also added "and discussion" to the first sentence of the Stage 5 section of our manuscript to clarify that the PRISMA- ScR checklist will be used to inform the writing of our discussion section in addition to our results section.

I do value the importance of smoking in epilepsy pathogenesis and pharmacotherapy and would like the authors to add another question: the impact of passive smoking during pregnancy on thr incidence of epilepsy development in offsprings via retrospective evaluation.

We thank the reviewer for this input. We agree that the neurologic outcomes of children of mothers who are exposed to passive smoking during pregnancy is an important topic that could benefit from further research. However, we have chosen not to include the effects of smoking on epilepsy outcomes in children of mothers who smoke in this review. Our review is quite broad and seeks to scope a body of literature to address multiple questions. We are concerned that adding this as an additional question would limit our ability to synthesize evidence and discuss our results in a single manuscript.

The scoping review protocol was prepared according to the standardized method stipulated by JBIM. The review objectives are all clear and well defined. Just one suggestion, if the keyword for Tobacco should expand: 'Tobacco products' to ensure that the authors won't miss any kind of specific tobacco products that used in other studies from local settings such as kretek, Shisha, Bidis. The rest is all good and clearly written.

Thank you for this helpful comment. We agree that this would improve our search strategy.

We have made the changes described above. (We have added a sentence to the second paragraph of our search strategy section describing this change. We have updated Figure 1 to include these terms in our search.)

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers epilepsy and smoking.docx

Decision Letter 1

Sathish Rajaa

20 Jun 2023

How do smoking, vaping, and nicotine affect people with epilepsy and seizures? A scoping review protocol

PONE-D-22-27041R1

Dear Dr. Narrett,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Sathish Rajaa

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Dear [Author's Name],

I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you about the status of your manuscript, titled "How do smoking, vaping, and nicotine affect people with epilepsy and seizures? A scoping review protocol", which you submitted to our esteemed journal Plos one. As an Academic Editor, I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has successfully completed the revision process and has now entered the peer review stage.

I want to express my appreciation for the thorough revisions you have made in response to the reviewers' comments. After carefully evaluating the revised manuscript, I am pleased to inform you that the reviewers have expressed their satisfaction with the changes made. They have acknowledged the improvements and believe that your manuscript is now ready for publication in its current form.

Please note that the acceptance is conditional upon successfully completing the remaining editorial and production processes. Our editorial team will now work diligently to move the manuscript forward, ensuring that all necessary steps are taken to prepare it for publication.

Once again, I want to congratulate you on the successful revisions and the acceptance of your manuscript. I appreciate your dedication and hard work throughout the peer review process. Your research will undoubtedly enrich the scientific discourse within your field.

Thank you for choosing Plos one as the outlet for your important research.

Best regards,

Sathish Rajaa

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions?

The research question outlined is expected to address a valid academic problem or topic and contribute to the base of knowledge in the field.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses?

The manuscript should describe the methods in sufficient detail to prevent undisclosed flexibility in the experimental procedure or analysis pipeline, including sufficient outcome-neutral conditions (e.g. necessary controls, absence of floor or ceiling effects) to test the proposed hypotheses and a statistical power analysis where applicable. As there may be aspects of the methodology and analysis which can only be refined once the work is undertaken, authors should outline potential assumptions and explicitly describe what aspects of the proposed analyses, if any, are exploratory.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable?

Descriptions of methods and materials in the protocol should be reported in sufficient detail for another researcher to reproduce all experiments and analyses. The protocol should describe the appropriate controls, sample size calculations, and replication needed to ensure that the data are robust and reproducible.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception, at the time of publication. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics.

You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study.

(Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I value your addressing of my feedback comment and look forward to getting it published. Thank you for the chance.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Mohamed Mostafa

**********

Acceptance letter

Sathish Rajaa

26 Jun 2023

PONE-D-22-27041R1

How do smoking, vaping, and nicotine affect people with epilepsy and seizures? A scoping review protocol

Dear Dr. Narrett:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Sathish Rajaa

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Checklist. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers epilepsy and smoking.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. All relevant data from this study will be made available upon study completion.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES