Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37396656›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2023

Diagnostic utility of movement disorder society criteria for multiple system atrophy.

Lingyu Zhang, Yanbing Hou, Qianqian Wei, Ruwei Ou, Kuncheng Liu, Junyu Lin, Tianmi Yang, Yi Xiao, Bi Zhao, Huifang Shang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

10 authors.

Lingyu ZhangLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yanbing HouLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qianqian WeiLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ruwei OuLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Kuncheng LiuLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Junyu LinLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Tianmi YangLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yi XiaoLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Bi ZhaoLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Huifang ShangLaboratory of Neurodegenerative Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rare Diseases Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The 2008 criteria for the diagnosis of multiple system atrophy (MSA) has been widely used for more than 10 years, but the sensitivity is low, particularly for patients in the early stage. Recently, a new MSA diagnostic criteria was developed. Objective: The objective of the study was to assess and compare the diagnostic utility of the new movement disorder society (MDS) MSA criteria with the 2008 MSA criteria. Methods: This study included patients diagnosed with MSA between January 2016 and October 2021. All patients underwent regular face-to-face or telephonic follow-ups every year until October 2022. A total of 587 patients (309 males and 278 females) were retrospectively reviewed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the MDS MSA criteria to that of the 2008 MSA criteria (determined by the proportion of patients categorized as established or probable MSA). Autopsy is the gold standard diagnosis of MSA, which is not available in clinical practice. Thus, we applied the 2008 MSA criteria at the last review as the reference standard. Results: The sensitivity of the MDS MSA criteria (93.2%, 95% CI = 90.5-95.2%) was significantly higher than that of the 2008 MSA criteria (83.5%, 95% CI = 79.8-86.6%) ( Conclusion: The present study demonstrated that the MDS MSA criteria exhibited good diagnostic utility for MSA. The new MDS MSA criteria should be considered as a useful diagnostic tool for clinical practice and future therapeutic trials.

Indexed as

cohort studydiagnostic criteriamultiple system atrophysensitivityspecificity

Identifiers

PMID37396656
PMCPMC10310919

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.