Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38362016›Full record

ReviewPolish journal of radiology2023

The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: what has changed in diagnostic criteria?

Anna Jankowska, Kamil Chwojnicki, Edyta Szurowska

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Polish journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna Jankowska2 Department of Radiology, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland.
Kamil ChwojnickiDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland.
Edyta Szurowska2 Department of Radiology, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland.
Gdańsk Medical University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, demyelinating disease affecting the central nervous system. Diagnosis of MS is based on the proof of disease dissemination in time (DIT) and dissemination in space (DIS) and excluding other disorders that can mimic multiple sclerosis in laboratory tests and clinical manifestation. Over the years the diagnostic criteria have evolved; the introduction of magnetic resonance in the McDonald's 2001 criteria was revolutionary. Since then, the criteria have been modified up to the currently used McDonald 2017. The aim of this review is to analyse the 2017 McDonald criteria, assess what has changed from the 2010 criteria, and present the impact of revised criteria on rapid and accurate diagnosis of MS. The main differences are as follows: inclusion of oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid as a DIT criterion, and symptomatic and cortical lesions in magnetic resonance imaging are counted in the determination of DIS and DIT. We present also the newest recommendations of the Polish Medical Society of Radiology and the Polish Society of Neurology and international group of North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis and Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers, as well as future directions for further investigations. A proper diagnosis is crucial for the patient's quality of life, to give the possibility of early treatment, and to help avoid misdiagnosis and unnecessary therapy.

Indexed as

criteriamagnetic resonancemultiple sclerosis

Identifiers

PMID38362016
PMCPMC10867947
OpenAlexW4389951572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.