ArticleArchives of neurology2012
Differential diagnosis of Jakob-Creutzfeldt disease.
Article in Archives of neurology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 108 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Neuropsychiatric symptoms in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Article
- Diagnostic Journey and Health Care Burden of Patients With Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease in the United States: A Real-World Evidence Study.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2025Article
- Internal consistency, construct validity, and responsiveness of the MRC Prion Disease Rating Scale.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- "By the Time We Knew …": Poetic Analysis of End-of-Life Caregiving Experiences for Rapidly Progressive and Slower-Duration Dementia Syndromes.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
- Diagnosis of Prion Diseases.Sub-cellular biochemistry · 2025Review
- Interpretable deep learning survival predictions in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Article
- Characterization of Laboratory-Confirmed Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease From 3 Ontario Tertiary Care Centers Between 2012 and 2022: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- A Systematic Review of Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Therapeutic Attempts.Neurology international · 2024Review
- Parkinsonism as an initial presentation of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: A case report and review of literature.Clinical case reports · 2024Article
- Euphoric Presentation in Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease and Its Diagnostic Implications: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
- Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and other prion diseases.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024Review
- Improving Early Recognition of Treatment-Responsive Causes of Rapidly Progressive Dementia: The STAMAnnals of neurology · 2024Observational
- Diagnostic challenge of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in a patient with multimorbidity: a case-report.BMC neurology · 2023Article
- Misdiagnosis of rarest subtype of sporadic Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease: a case report.BMC neurology · 2023Article
- Caregiver Experiences Navigating the Diagnostic Journey in a Rapidly Progressing Dementia.Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology · 2023Article
- Article
- Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: A case report and differential diagnoses.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo identify the misdiagnoses of patients with sporadic Jakob-Creutzfeldt disease (sCJD) during the course of their disease and determine which medical specialties saw patients with sCJD prior to the correct diagnosis being made and at what point in the disease course a correct diagnosis was made.
designRetrospective medical record review.
settingA specialty referral center of a tertiary academic medical center.
participantsOne hundred sixty-three serial patients over a 5.5-year period who ultimately had pathologically proven sCJD. The study used the subset of 97 patients for whom we had adequate medical records.
main outcome measuresOther diagnoses considered in the differential diagnosis and types of medical specialties assessing patients with sCJD.
resultsNinety-seven subjects' records were used in the final analysis. The most common disease categories of misdiagnosis were neurodegenerative, autoimmune/paraneoplastic, infectious, and toxic/metabolic disorders. The most common individual misdiagnoses were viral encephalitis, paraneoplastic disorder, depression, vertigo, Alzheimer disease, stroke, unspecified dementia, central nervous system vasculitis, peripheral neuropathy, and Hashimoto encephalopathy. The physicians who most commonly made these misdiagnoses were primary care physicians and neurologists; in the 18% of patients who were diagnosed correctly at their first assessment, the diagnosis was almost always by a neurologist. The mean time from onset to diagnosis was 7.9 months, an average of two-thirds of the way through their disease course.
conclusionsDiagnosis of sCJD is quite delayed. When evaluating patients with rapidly progressive dementia with suspected neurodegenerative, autoimmune, infectious, or toxic/metabolic etiology, sCJD should also be included in the differential diagnosis, and appropriate diagnostic tests, such as diffusion brain magnetic resonance imaging, should be considered. Primary care physicians and neurologists need improved training in sCJD diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.