Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30713520›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2018

Diagnostic and Prognostic Performance of Neurofilaments in ALS.

Koen Poesen, Philip Van Damme

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

88 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. A Phase 1 study of GDC-0134, a dual leucine zipper kinase inhibitor, in ALS.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Tofersen Treatment inMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Clinical use and reporting of neurofilament quantification in neurological disorders: A global overview.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Koen PoesenDepartment of Neurosciences, Laboratory for Molecular Neurobiomarker Research, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Philip Van DammeLaboratory of Neurobiology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven and Center for Brain & Disease Research VIB Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a need for biomarkers for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), to support the diagnosis of the disease, to predict disease progression and to track disease activity and treatment responses. Over the last decade multiple studies have investigated the potential of neurofilament levels, both in cerebrospinal fluid and blood, as biomarker for ALS. The most widely studied neurofilament subunits are neurofilament light chain (NfL) and phosphorylated neurofilament heavy chain (pNfH). Neurofilament levels are reflecting neuronal injury and therefore potentially of value in ALS and other neurological disorders. In this mini-review, we summarize and discuss the available evidence about neurofilaments as diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for human ALS.

Indexed as

amyotrophic lateral sclerosiscerebrospinal fluidfrontotemporal dementianeurofilamentNfLplasmapNfHserum

Identifiers

PMID30713520
PMCPMC6345692
OpenAlexW2909422691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.