ReviewJournal of neurology2026
Prognostic factors in paediatric-onset multiple sclerosis: a narrative review.
Review in Journal of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPaediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (POMS) accounts for 3-10% of multiple sclerosis (MS) cases and differs from adult-onset disease in course, treatment response and long-term outcomes. Risk stratification is essential, yet the literature frequently conflates three distinct questions: which children develop MS (susceptibility), which convert from a first demyelinating event (conversion) and which, once diagnosed, will accrue disability (prognosis).
objectiveThis study aimed to provide a narrative overview of candidate prognostic factors in POMS, separated from susceptibility and conversion factors and organised by the outcome each predicts.
methodsPubMed and Google Scholar were searched (2002-2025, with hand searching of pivotal 2026 cohorts) using a predefined string and full eligibility criteria. Factors were classified along three axes of inference and graded into four evidence tiers (replicated; preliminary; susceptibility rather than prognosis; inconsistent). No formal risk-of-bias assessment was undertaken, consistent with the narrative design.
resultsThe most reproducible post-diagnosis predictors were early inflammatory activity (relapse number and inter-attack interval in the first two years, annualised relapse rate, early EDSS change), lesion topography (brainstem, spinal cord), T2 lesion accrual, serum neurofilament light chain and treatment-related variables (delayed disease-modifying therapy, early high-efficacy treatment). Advanced MRI metrics, serum glial fibrillary acidic protein and other fluid biomarkers remain preliminary; baseline EDSS was inconsistent. Most dietary, environmental and perinatal exposures relate to susceptibility, not course.
conclusionsCurrent evidence supports candidate predictors, not a validated instrument, and inference is further complicated by confounding by indication. A multidimensional, externally validated POMS-specific prognostic score remains to be developed-the aim of the ongoing PROMISING study.
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.