Cited by 148Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders

Incidence of multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis in referrals to two academic centers

Kaisey, Marwa, Solomon, Andrew J., Luu, Michael, Giesser, Barbara S., Sicotte, Nancy L.·2019·Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders

Abstract

Background Multiple Sclerosis (MS) specialists routinely evaluate misdiagnosed patients, or patients incorrectly assigned a diagnosis of MS. Misdiagnosis has significant implications for patient morbidity and healthcare costs, yet its contemporary incidence is unknown. We examined the incidence of MS misdiagnosis in new patients referred to two academic MS referral centers, their most common alternate diagnoses, and factors associated with misdiagnosis. Methods Demographic data, comorbidities, neurological examination findings, radiographic and laboratory results, a determination of 2010 McDonald Criteria fulfillment, and final diagnoses were collected from all new patient evaluations completed at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and the University of California, Los Angeles MS clinics over twelve months. Results Of the 241 new patients referred with an established diagnosis of MS, 17% at Cedars-Sinai and 19% at UCLA were identified as having been misdiagnosed. The most common alternative diagnoses were migraine (16%), radiologically isolated syndrome (9%), spondylopathy (7%), and neuropathy (7%). Clinical syndromes and radiographic findings atypical for MS were both associated with misdiagnosis. The misdiagnosed group received approximately 110 patient-years of unnecessary MS disease modifying therapy. Conclusion MS misdiagnosis is common; in our combined cohort, almost 1 in 5 patients who carried an established diagnosis of MS did not fulfill contemporary McDonald Criteria and had a more likely alternate diagnosis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.msard.2019.01.048

Cites

22 of 22 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaisey, M., Solomon, A. J., Luu, M., Giesser, B. S., & Sicotte, N. L.
Affiliations
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Kaisey, Marwa
Venue
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
30
Pages
51-56
ISSN
2211-0348 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2911408542
Cited by
148
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 7
FWCI
11.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, misdiagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, McDonald criteria, radiologically isolated syndrome, migraine, neuropathy, atypical radiographic findings
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Adult, Diagnostic Errors, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Retrospective Studies, Incidence

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