ReviewActa neurologica Scandinavica2015
Time trends in the incidence and prevalence of multiple sclerosis in Norway during eight decades.
Review in Acta neurologica Scandinavica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- Aging with multiple sclerosis and associated prevalence, incidence, comorbidities and healthcare utilization patterns in a population based study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Direction of global health status: a narrative review and recommendation for incorporating integrative medicine for improvement.Journal of medicine and life · 2025Review
- Identifying multiple sclerosis in women of childbearing age in six European countries: a contribution from the ConcePTION project.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Advancements in multiple sclerosis.Internal medicine journal · 2025Review
- Multiple sclerosis: emerging epidemiological trends and redefining the clinical course.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Review
- Male patients with inflammatory joint diseases are less likely than controls to be childless: results from a Norwegian population-based cohort study of 10 865 patients.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2024Article
- Barriers for work in people with multiple sclerosis: a Norwegian cultural adaptation and validation of the short version of the multiple sclerosis work difficulties questionnaire.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Novel Approaches in the Immunotherapy of Multiple Sclerosis: Cyclization of Myelin Epitope Peptides and Conjugation with Mannan.Brain sciences · 2021Review
- High incidence and prevalence of MS in Møre and Romsdal County, Norway, 1950-2018.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2020Observational
- Microbiome in Multiple Sclerosis; Where Are We, What We Know and Do Not Know.Brain sciences · 2020Review
- Article
- Epidemiology and treatment of multiple sclerosis in elderly populations.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2019Review
- Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis: General and Perceived Fatigue Does Not Depend on Corticospinal Tract Dysfunction.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- A Framework for Estimating the Burden of Chronic Diseases: Design and Application in the Context of Multiple Sclerosis.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- The hygiene hypothesis in autoimmunity: the role of pathogens and commensals.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2018Review
- The Growing Incidence of Bullous Pemphigoid: Overview and Potential Explanations.Frontiers in medicine · 2018Review
- Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders during 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015.The Lancet. Neurology · 2017Article
- Therapeutic Targets for Multiple Sclerosis: Current Treatment Goals and Future Directions.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2017Review
- Survival and cause of death in multiple sclerosis: a 60-year longitudinal population study.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2017Article
- Multiple Sclerosis: Immunopathology and Treatment Update.Brain sciences · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Norway has been subjected to numerous epidemiological investigations on the prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis (MS), dating back to 1935. The objective of this study was to review the studies on the prevalence and incidence of MS in Norway, provide an update on the prevalence of MS in Norway, and describe the time trends in the prevalence and incidence of MS in relation to risk factors, case ascertainment, and data. We performed a systematic search on PubMed and MEDLINE up to November 2014 using the search string 'multiple sclerosis prevalence in Norway' or 'multiple sclerosis incidence in Norway'. In addition, we scrutinized the reference lists of the publications identified for relevant citations. We retrieved data on the distribution of MS in Norway on December 31, 2013 from the Norwegian Multiple Sclerosis Registry and Biobank and the Norwegian Patient Registry. We identified 29 articles. From 1961 to 2014, the reported prevalence of MS increased from 20 to 203 per 100,000 inhabitants, and the incidence increased from 1.9 to 8.0 per 100,000. The nationwide crude prevalence in Norway, based on the Norwegian Patient Registry, was 208 per 100,000 on December 31, 2013. The reported prevalence of MS in Norway has increased 10-fold, with several possible causes. During eight decades, neurological health services have generally become more accessible to the population, and transforming diagnostic criteria has made the diagnosis of MS more precise and valid. There have also been changes in lifestyle behavior and known risk factors, such as vitamin D and smoking, that might have contributed to the increased incidence of MS. A possible role of increased survival in MS needs to be examined further.
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.