Observational studyJournal of neurology2024
Differentiation between viral and autoimmune limbic encephalitis: a prospective cohort study with development and validation of a diagnostic model.
Observational study in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a prediction model integrating PD-1 and ICOS for early differential diagnosis between autoimmune and viral encephalitis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Anti-metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 coexistent anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDistinguishing between viral encephalitis (VE) and autoimmune limbic encephalitis (ALE) presents a clinical challenge due to the overlap in symptoms. We aimed to develop and validate a diagnostic prediction model to differentiate VE and ALE.
methodsA prospective observational multicentre cohort study, which continuously enrolled patients diagnosed with either ALE or VE from October 2011 to April 2023. The demographic data, clinical features, and laboratory test results were collected and subjected to logistic regression analyses. The model was displayed as a web-based nomogram and then modified into a scored prediction tool. Model performance was assessed in both derivation and external validation cohorts.
resultsA total of 2423 individuals were recruited, and 1001 (496 VE, 505 ALE) patients were included. Based on the derivation cohort (389 VE, 388 ALE), the model was developed with eight variables including age at onset, acuity, fever, headache, nausea/vomiting, psychiatric or memory complaints, status epilepticus, and CSF white blood cell count. The model showed good discrimination and calibration in both derivation (AUC 0.890; 0.868-0.913) and external validation (107 VE, 117 ALE, AUC 0.872; 0.827-0.917) cohorts. The scored prediction tool had a total point that ranged from - 4 to 10 also showing good discrimination and calibration in both derivation (AUC 0.885, 0.863-0.908) and external validation (AUC 0.868, 0.823-0.913) cohorts.
conclusionsThe prediction model provides a reliable and user-friendly tool for differentiating between the VE and ALE, which would benefit early diagnosis and appropriate treatment and alleviate economic burdens on both patients and society.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38858284What 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.