2010 McDonald Criteria for diagnosing pediatric multiple sclerosis
Abstract
Objective The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) rests on confirmation of central nervous system inflammatory disease that is disseminated in space and time, as evidenced clinically or by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The 2010 McDonald criteria simplified MRI requirements, and newly proposed that the criteria are also suitable for the diagnosis of pediatric MS. Methods In a national prospective incident cohort study of children with acute demyelination observed for a minimum of 24 months, baseline and serial clinical and MRI examinations were used to retrospectively evaluate the 2010 and 2005 McDonald criteria using clinically relapsing disease as the gold standard. Results Of 212 eligible participants, 34 experienced 2 or more clinical attacks, 58 met the 2010 criteria, and 42 met 2005 McDonald criteria. The 2010 criteria demonstrated high sensitivity (100%), specificity (86%), positive predictive value (76%), and negative predictive value (100%) for children older than 11 years with non-acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) presentations, as did the 2005 McDonald criteria. In younger children with a non-ADEM presentation, PPV of the 2010 criteria was only 55%. None of the 50 children with ADEM met clinical criteria for MS, but 10 met 2010 and 4 met 2005 criteria. Interpretation Both 2005 and 2010 McDonald criteria identify children with relapsing-remitting MS, although caution is suggested when applying these criteria in younger children. The 2010 McDonald crite…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several studies support the applicability of the 2010 McDonald Criteria in children.
“Several studies support the applicability of the 2010 McDonald Criteria in children. 29-36”
From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria (2018) · cites this paper as [35]
The performance of the McDonald 2010 criteria has been tested in children with CIS and the criteria have a similar sensitivity/specificity for the development of MS as in adult populations but should not be applied in the setting of encephalopathy (i.e. ADEM).
“The performance of the McDonald 2010 criteria has been tested in children with CIS and the criteria have a similar sensitivity/specificity for the development of MS as in adult populations 35 but should not be applied in the setting of encephalopathy (i.e.ADEM).32”
From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges (2017) · cites this paper as [35]
Cites
Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria
Polman, C. H., Reingold, S. C., Banwell, B., Clanet, M., Cohen, J. A., Filippi, M., Fujihara, K., Havrdova, E., Hutchinson, M., Kappos, L., et al. (2011) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.22366 · Cited by 9,802 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria
Thompson, A. J., Banwell, B. L., Barkhof, F., Carroll, W. M., Coetzee, T., Comi, G., Correale, J., Fazekas, F., Filippi, M., Freedman, M. S., et al. (2018) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(17)30470-2 · Cited by 8,167 · see citing works
Self-citationKrupp, L. B., Tardieu, M., Amato, M. P., Banwell, B., Chitnis, T., Dale, R. C., Ghezzi, A., Hintzen, R., Kornberg, A., Pohl, D., et al. (2013) · Multiple Sclerosis Journal · doi:10.1177/1352458513484547 · Cited by 1,130 · see citing works
Self-citationDiagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges
Brownlee, W. J., Hardy, T. A., Fazekas, F., & Miller, D. H. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30959-x · Cited by 701 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sadaka, Y., Verhey, L. H., Shroff, M. M., Branson, H. M., Arnold, D. L., Narayanan, S., Sled, J. G., Bar‐Or, A., Sadovnick, A. D., McGowan, M., Marrie, R. A., Banwell, B., & on behalf of the Canadian Pediatric Demyelinating Disease Network
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (CA)
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Health Sciences Centre (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Banwell, Brenda
- ORCID
- Venue
- Annals of Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-08
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 211-223
- ISSN
- 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-8249
- OpenAlex
- W2008871548
- Cited by
- 136
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 9.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of Neurology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Multiple Sclerosis Scientific Research Foundation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- pediatric multiple sclerosis, diagnostic criteria, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, demyelination, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, magnetic resonance imaging, sensitivity and specificity, children
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Age Factors, Central Nervous System, Child, Diagnosis, Differential, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Multiple Sclerosis, Pediatrics, Predictive Value of Tests, Retrospective Studies, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Cohort Studies, Outcome Assessment, Health Care
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