Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 242

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Mimic Syndromes: A Population-Based Study

Traynor, B. J., Codd, M. B., Corr, B., Forde, C., Frost, E., Hardiman, Orla·2000·Archives of Neurology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Irish ALS Register is a population-based register of the epidemiological characteristics of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in the republic of Ireland. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and demographic details of those patients included in the Irish ALS Register who were incorrectly diagnosed as having ALS (patients who were ultimately rediagnosed as having an "ALS mimic syndrome"). METHODS: The medical records of each patient referred to the register are routinely reviewed and, where possible, patients are examined by our group during their illness. RESULTS: Between January 1, 1993, and December 31, 1997, 32 patients (representing 7.3% of 437 referrals) were rediagnosed as having a condition other than ALS. The median age at onset for these 32 patients was 56.0 years (range, 19.5-85.8 years) for men and 53.5 years (range, 39.5-70.4 years) for women. Twenty-nine patients (91%) presented with symptoms referable to the limbs, and the remainder presented with symptoms involving the bulbar musculature. Multifocal motor neuropathy was the most common condition mistaken for ALS, accounting for 7 cases (22%), followed closely by Kennedy disease (4 cases [13%]). Factors leading to diagnostic revision included evolution of atypical symptoms, results of specific investigations, and failure of symptoms to progress. Twenty-seven (84%) of the patients with an ALS mimic syndrome fulfilled the El Escorial criteria for either "suspected" or "possible" ALS, 4 (13%) met the criteria for probable ALS, and 1 (3%) had definite ALS. CONCLUSIONS: The application of the El Escorial diagnostic criteria may facilitate early recognition of non-ALS cases. Misdiagnosis of ALS remains a common clinical problem despite the increased availability of investigations and a greater awareness among neurologists of potential diagnostic pitfalls.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archneur.57.1.109

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 242

Metadata

Authors
Traynor, B. J., Codd, M. B., Corr, B., Forde, C., Frost, E., & Hardiman, O.
Venue
Archives of Neurology
Published
2000-01-01
Volume
57
Issue
1
Pages
109
ISSN
0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2170672384
Cited by
242
References
0
FWCI
3.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Mimic Syndromes: A Population-Based Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archneur.57.1.109
The paper
Traynor, B. J., Codd, M. B., Corr, B., Forde, C., Frost, E., & Hardiman, O. (2000). Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Mimic Syndromes: A Population-Based Study. Archives of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.57.1.109

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.