Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31209474›Full record

ReviewBrain : a journal of neurology2019

Assessment of lesions on magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis: practical guidelines.

Massimo Filippi, Paolo Preziosa, Brenda L Banwell, Frederik Barkhof, Olga Ciccarelli, Nicola De Stefano, Jeroen J G Geurts, Friedemann Paul, Daniel S Reich, Ahmed T Toosy and 7 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 256 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
256citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
35.5field-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

256 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 529 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Simultaneous TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Review

196 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

17 authors at 14 institutions in 8 countries.

Massimo FilippiNeuroimaging Research Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Paolo PreziosaNeuroimaging Research Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Brenda L BanwellDivision of Neurology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
Frederik BarkhofDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Olga CiccarelliQueen Square MS Centre, Department of Neuroinflammation, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, UK.
Nicola De StefanoDepartment of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
Jeroen J G GeurtsDepartment of Anatomy and Neurosciences, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Friedemann PaulNeuroCure Clinical Research Center and Experimental and Clinical Research Center, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine and Charité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Daniel S ReichTranslational Neuroradiology Section, Division of Neuroimmunology and Neurovirology, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Ahmed T ToosyQueen Square MS Centre, Department of Neuroinflammation, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, UK.
Anthony TraboulseeMS/MRI Research Group, Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, Division of Neurology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Mike P WattjesDepartment of Neuroradiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Tarek A YousryDivision of Neuroradiology and Neurophysics, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, UK.
Achim GassDepartment of Neurology, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Catherine LubetzkiSorbonne University, AP-HP Pitié-Salpétriére Hospital, Department of Neurology, 75013 Paris, France.
Brian G WeinshenkerDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Maria A RoccaNeuroimaging Research Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University · ITQueen Mary University of London · GBAmsterdam Neuroscience · NLChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia · USHeidelberg University · DEMax Delbrück Center · DEMayo Clinic · USMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DENational Institutes of Health · USSorbonne Université · FRUniversity College London · GBUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Siena · ITVrije Universiteit Brussel · BE

Funding

Multimodal MRI in Multiple SclerosisZIANS003119 · NINDS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI REICH, DANIEL · 2010 to 2025
$53.4M
Medical Research Council MR/M009106/1Medical Research Council MR/S026088/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MRI has improved the diagnostic work-up of multiple sclerosis, but inappropriate image interpretation and application of MRI diagnostic criteria contribute to misdiagnosis. Some diseases, now recognized as conditions distinct from multiple sclerosis, may satisfy the MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis (e.g. neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders, Susac syndrome), thus making the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis more challenging, especially if biomarker testing (such as serum anti-AQP4 antibodies) is not informative. Improvements in MRI technology contribute and promise to better define the typical features of multiple sclerosis lesions (e.g. juxtacortical and periventricular location, cortical involvement). Greater understanding of some key aspects of multiple sclerosis pathobiology has allowed the identification of characteristics more specific to multiple sclerosis (e.g. central vein sign, subpial demyelination and lesional rims), which are not included in the current multiple sclerosis diagnostic criteria. In this review, we provide the clinicians and researchers with a practical guide to enhance the proper recognition of multiple sclerosis lesions, including a thorough definition and illustration of typical MRI features, as well as a discussion of red flags suggestive of alternative diagnoses. We also discuss the possible place of emerging qualitative features of lesions which may become important in the near future.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMultiple SclerosisNeuroimagingdiagnostic criteriaguidelineslesionsmagnetic resonance imagingmultiple sclerosis

Identifiers

PMID31209474
PMCPMC6598631
OpenAlexW2951680115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.