ArticleBiomedicines2023
Follow-Up Findings in Multiple System Atrophy from [
Article in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Semiquantitative [¹²³I]FP-CIT SPECT metrics combined with machine learning improve clinical differentiation of Parkinson's disease and atypical parkinsonian syndrome.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Development of a radiomics-based model for diagnosis of multiple system atrophy using multimodal MRI.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Comparative Study between the Diagnostic Effectiveness of Brain SPECT with [Biomedicines · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple system atrophy (MSA) is subdivided into two types: MSA-P (parkinsonian) and MSA-C (cerebellar). Brain SPECT allows for the detection of nigrostriatal involvement, even in the early stages. To date, the scientific literature does not show a consensus on how to follow-up MSA, especially MSA-C. Our aim was to analyze the diagnostic effectiveness of repeat [
methodsA longitudinal observational study on 22 MSA patients (11 males and 11 females).
resultsSignificant changes were obtained in the quantitative SPECT assessments in the three Striatum/Occipital indices. The qualitative SPECT diagnosis did not show differences between the initial and evolving SPECT, but the neurologist's clinical suspicion did. Our results showed a brain deterioration of around 31% at 12 months, this being the optimal cut-off for differentiating a diseased subject (capable of solving diagnostic error rate). Previous imaging tests were inconclusive, as they showed less deterioration in the SPECT and quantitative assessments with respect to the group of confirmed patients. Repeated SPECT increased the diagnostic sensitivity (50% vs. 75%) and positive predictive value (72.73% vs. 77%). In addition, repeated SPECT proved decisive in the diagnosis of initial inconclusive cases.
conclusionRepeat SPECT at 12 months proves useful in the diagnosis and follow-up of MSA.
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.