Cited by 73Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Predicting neuropsychological abnormalities in multiple sclerosis

Benedict, Ralph H.B., Zivadinov, Robert·2006·Journal of the Neurological Sciences

Abstract

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is associated with MRI signal alteration and neuropsychological (NP) dysfunction. Screening tools have been developed to identify patients at high risk for these neurological complications of MS. One such measure, the Multiple Sclerosis Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ), has well-established reliability and predictive validity. In this article, we report on the accumulated findings derived from 162 consecutive research participants and MS clinic attendees. Our data show significant correlation between both patient- and informant-report MSNQ and NP impairment. As shown previously, larger, and more significant correlations are found between informant-report MSNQs than with patient-report MSNQs. In addition, we find that the MSNQ predicts follow-up NP testing 51 weeks after baseline with a similar degree of association. Finally, the MSNQ is correlated with MRI measures of whole-brain lesion burden and atrophy, secondary progressive course, and vocational disability. We conclude that the MSNQ is reliable and valid for detecting neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric complications of MS.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jns.2005.05.020

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Cognition determines, to a considerable extent, one's social and professional success and the ability to live independently.

    “Cognition determines, to a considerable extent, one's social and professional success and the ability to live independently (Audet, Hebert, Dubois, Rochette, & Mercier, 2007; Benedict & Zivadinov, 2006; Green, Kern, Braff, & Mintz, 2000).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Benedict, R. H. B., & Zivadinov, R.
Affiliations
State University of New York (US)
Venue
Journal of the Neurological Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-06
Volume
245
Issue
1-2
Pages
67-72
ISSN
0022-510X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2066915179
Cited by
73
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 11
FWCI
2.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the Neurological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Biogen
  • IC Design Education Center
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, neuropsychological dysfunction, screening questionnaire, informant reports, patient reports, predictive validity, brain atrophy, secondary progressive multiple sclerosis, neuropsychiatric complications
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Cognition Disorders, Disability Evaluation, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Neuropsychological Tests, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results

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