ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2024
Towards new perspectives: A scoping review and meta-synthesis to redefine brain health for multiple sclerosis.
Article in European journal of neurology, 2024. 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.
- Sensitivity and Specificity of a Revised Version of the TRACK-MS Screening Battery for Early Detection of Cognitive Impairment in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Towards new perspectives: A scoping review and meta-synthesis to redefine brain health for multiple sclerosis.European journal of neurology · 2024Article
- The role of multidisciplinary MS care teams in supporting lifestyle behaviour changes to optimise brain health among people living with MS: A qualitative exploration of clinician perspectives.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeResearch promoting the health of the brain has increased exponentially over the last decade. The importance of 'brain health' for multiple sclerosis (MS), as one example, is a high priority. However, as research into the concept increases, so does varied use of the term.
methodsA scoping review, guided by the methodological framework of the Joanna Briggs Institute, was conducted to collate the evidence relating to brain health for MS. A comprehensive literature search incorporated six search strategies to retrieve both scientific and grey literature sources. All evidence sources were qualitatively charted and synthesized (meta-synthesis) according to their definition of brain health used, outcome measures and brain-healthy lifestyle elements.
resultsSeventy evidence sources (34 peer reviewed, 36 grey literature) were eligible for inclusion. Of these, just over half (n = 40, 57%) provided a definition of brain health. The most common definition alluded to the biomedical model of neurological reserve (n = 22, 55%), a self-remodelling theory described to retain optimal brain function. Twenty-nine outcome measures of brain health were identified, the most frequent being magnetic resonance imaging metrics (n = 25, 83%). Physical activity was the most prevalent brain-healthy lifestyle element (n = 44), followed by avoidance of smoking (n = 26) and diet (n = 24).
conclusionsBrain health should be considered a primary target for optimal disease and lifestyle management across the MS disease course. A working definition reflecting a shift from a medical lens towards broader biopsychosocial contexts that may influence brain health for people living with MS is proposed.
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.