Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31883522›Full record

ReviewJournal of neuroinflammation2019

The history of neuromyelitis optica. Part 2: 'Spinal amaurosis', or how it all began.

S Jarius, B Wildemann

Open access · goldAbstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neuroinflammation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Statins in Neuro-ophthalmology.Neuro-ophthalmology (Aeolus Press) · 2021
    Review
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.

S JariusDepartment of Neurology, Molecular Neuroimmunology Group, University of Heidelberg, Otto Meyerhof Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 350, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. sven.jarius@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
B WildemannDepartment of Neurology, Molecular Neuroimmunology Group, University of Heidelberg, Otto Meyerhof Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 350, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuromyelitis optica (NMO) was long considered a clinical variant of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the discovery of a novel and pathogenic anti-astrocytic serum autoantibody targeting aquaporin-4 (termed NMO-IgG or AQP4-Ab), the most abundant water channel protein in the central nervous system, led to the recognition of NMO as a distinct disease entity in its own right and generated strong and persisting interest in the condition. NMO is now studied as a prototypic autoimmune disorder, which differs from MS in terms of immunopathogenesis, clinicoradiological presentation, optimum treatment, and prognosis. While the history of classic MS has been extensively studied, relatively little is known about the history of NMO. In Part 1 of this series we focused on the late 19th century, when the term 'neuromyelitis optica' was first coined, traced the term's origins and followed its meandering evolution throughout the 20th and into the 21st century. Here, in Part 2, we demonstrate that the peculiar concurrence of acute optic nerve and spinal cord affliction characteristic for NMO caught the attention of physicians much earlier than previously thought by re-presenting a number of very early cases of possible NMO that date back to the late 18th and early 19th century. In addition, we comprehensively discuss the pioneering concept of 'spinal amaurosis', which was introduced into the medical literature by ophthalmologists in the first half of the 19th century.

Indexed as

BlindnessHistory, 18th CenturyHistory, 19th CenturyHumansNeurologyNeuromyelitis OpticaAmaurose spinaleAquaporin-4 (AQP4) antibodiesDevic’s syndromeHistory of medicineHistory of neurologyMultiple sclerosisMyelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) antibodiesNeuromyelitis optica (NMO)Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD)Optic neuritisSpinal amaurosisTransverse myelitis

Identifiers

PMID31883522
PMCPMC6935230
OpenAlexW2997981604

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.