ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2026
The Diagnostic Accuracy of the Second Revision of the European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society Guideline for Diagnosing Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyradiculoneuropathy.
Article in European 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiagnosing chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) relies on clinical and electrodiagnostic features. In 2021, the European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) revised the CIDP guideline, superseding the 2010 European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS)/PNS guideline. This study compares the diagnostic accuracy of both guidelines and evaluates the impact of specific criterion changes and nerve conduction study (NCS) extensiveness.
methodsPatients with CIDP were included if they fulfilled the 2010 EFNS/PNS electrodiagnostic criteria for at least possible CIDP or had a presumptive clinical CIDP diagnosis with objective treatment response. Matched controls were patients with suspected chronic immune-mediated neuropathy who received a diagnosis other than CIDP. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using two thresholds: one including possible CIDP and one restricted to (probable/definite) CIDP. The impact of electrodiagnostic criteria changes and NCS extensiveness on diagnostic performance was assessed.
resultsWe included 339 patients and 339 matched controls. Sensitivity of the 2010 EFNS/PNS guideline was 92% when including possible CIDP and 91% for probable/definite CIDP, with specificities of 67% and 78%, respectively. For the 2021 EAN/PNS guideline, sensitivity was 94% when including possible CIDP and 83% for CIDP, with specificities of 66% and 86%, respectively. Differences were due to sensory criteria and changes in conduction block criteria. Unilateral NCS would miss 77 possible CIDP diagnoses.
conclusionSensitivity and specificity were comparable when including possible CIDP, but the 2021 EAN/PNS guideline showed lower sensitivity and higher specificity for CIDP alone. Modifying criteria, including removal of sensory abnormalities, and more extensive NCS enhanced accuracy.
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.