ArticleJournal of neurology2025
Development of anti-LGI1 autoimmune encephalitis outcome rating score using the Rasch analysis.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. 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.
- Neuroimmunology of Epilepsy: Mechanisms, Treatments, and Clinical Insights.Epilepsy currents · 2026Article
- Cytokine, Chemokine, and Neurofilament Light Chain Signatures in LGI1 Autoimmune Encephalitis.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnti-LGI1 autoimmune encephalitis is an immunotherapy-responsive condition with growing interest in clinical trial development. However, the lack of reliable outcome measures is a major barrier. We aim to design a disease-specific outcome measure for anti-LGI1 autoimmune encephalitis.
methodsThe anti-LGI1 autoimmune encephalitis outcome rating (LOR) score was proposed through expert consensus and literature review. It was applied to a development cohort of 81 patients, followed by Rasch analysis to evaluate item-person targeting, reliability, and dimensionality. Adjustments were made to improve its psychometric performance. The finalized score was re-applied to the development cohort and validated in a separate cohort of 54 patients. Finally, the score was assessed in a longitudinal cohort of 53 patients for responsiveness.
resultsThe LOR score consists of 6 items: seizure type, seizure frequency, memory, orientation, behavioral disturbance, and gait, with a total score of 19. Compared to the CASE score, the LOR score can better capture patients across varying levels of severity, without major floor or ceiling effects. The scoring within each item proportionally reflected the item's difficulty. The score was relatively unidimensional. The reliability (0.63) and separation (1.34) indicated very small random errors. The inter-rater and intra-rater reliability (κ > 0.85) was excellent. In the longitudinal cohort, the changes in LOR score are significantly different among different clinical impression of change (IOC) categories (p < 0.01), indicating its ability to detect clinically meaningful changes. DISCUSSION: The LOR score is a psychometrically reliable, sensitive, responsive, and relatively unidimensional outcome measure, which may be used in clinical practice and trial settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41217518What 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.