ArticleMultiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)2022
Multiple sclerosis diagnosis: Knowledge gaps and opportunities for educational intervention in neurologists in the United States.
Article in Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of the 2024 McDonald Criteria: Earlier Diagnosis and Avoiding Misdiagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis in a Global Setting.Neurology · 2026Review
- Physicians' Knowledge and Practice Regarding Multiple Sclerosis (MS) in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Implementing the 2024 revision of the McDonald diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis in Germany: Practical considerations and consensus recommendations.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2026Review
- Does Interrater Variation Influence the Classification According to the Diagnostic Criteria for Multiple Sclerosis?European journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Diagnosis and Its Differentiation from Neurological Mimics, MS and ALS: A Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Frequency and Diagnostic Implications of Paramagnetic Rim Lesions in People Presenting for Diagnosis to a Multiple Sclerosis Clinic.Neurology · 2025Observational
- Investigating Whether Dissemination in Time Is Essential to Diagnose Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.Neurology · 2025Article
- Misdiagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis: Past, Present, and Future.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- Diagnostic performance of central vein sign versus oligoclonal bands for multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2024Article
- Identification and management of subclinical disease activity in early multiple sclerosis: a review.Journal of neurology · 2024Review
- The diagnostic value of the central vein sign in radiologically isolated syndrome.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2024Article
- Application and interpretation of core elements of the 2015 NMOSD diagnostic criteria in routine clinical practice.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Global Barriers to the Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis: Data From the Multiple Sclerosis International Federation Atlas of MS, Third Edition.Neurology · 2023Article
- Confirming a Historical Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis: Challenges and Recommendations.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2022Article
- Article
- Diagnostic delay and misdiagnosis of symptoms reported by patients with multiple sclerosis participating in a research registry.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew studies have addressed the results of educational efforts concerning proper use of McDonald criteria (MC) revisions outside multiple sclerosis (MS) subspecialty centers. Neurology residents and MS subspecialist neurologists demonstrated knowledge gaps for core elements of the MC in a recent prior study.
objectiveTo assess comprehension and application of MC core elements by non-MS specialist neurologists in the United States who routinely diagnose MS.
methodsThrough a cross-sectional study design, a previously developed survey instrument was distributed online.
resultsA total of 222 neurologists completed the study survey. Syndromes atypical for MS were frequently incorrectly considered "typical" MS presentations. Fourteen percent correctly identified definitions of both "periventricular" and "juxtacortical" lesions and 2% correctly applied these terms to 9/9 images. Twenty-four percent correctly identified all four central nervous system (CNS) regions for satisfaction of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) dissemination in space. In two presented cases, 61% and 71% correctly identified dissemination in time (DIT) was not fulfilled, and 85% and 86% subsequently accepted nonspecific historical symptoms without objective evidence for DIT fulfillment.
conclusionThe high rate of knowledge deficiencies and application errors of core elements of the MC demonstrated by participants in this study raise pressing questions concerning adequacy of dissemination and educational efforts upon publication of revisions to MC.
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.