Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 475

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Validity and Reliability of the Preliminary NINDS Neuropathologic Criteria for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy and Related Disorders

Litvan, I., Hauw, J. J., Bartko, J. J., Lantos, P. L., Daniel, S. E., Horoupian, D. S., McKee, A., Dickson, D., Bancher, C., Tabaton, M., Jellinger, K., Anderson, D. W.·1996·Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology

Abstract

We investigated the validity and reliability of diagnoses made by eight neuropathologists who used the preliminary NINDS neuropathologic diagnostic criteria for progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and related disorders. The specific disorders were typical, atypical, and combined PSP, postencephalitic parkinsonism, corticobasal ganglionic degeneration, and Pick's disease. These disorders were chosen because of the difficulties in their neuropathologic differentiation. We assessed validity by measuring sensitivity and positive predictive value. Reliability was evaluated by measuring pairwise and group agreement. From a total of 62 histologic cases, each neuropathologist independently classified 16 to 19 cases for the pairwise analysis and 5 to 6 cases for the group analysis. The neuropathologists were unaware of the study design, unfamiliar with the assigned cases, and initially had no clinical information about the cases. Our results showed that with routine sampling and staining methods, neuropathologic examination alone was not fully adequate for differentiating the disorders. The main difficulties were discriminating the subtypes of PSP and separating postencephalitic parkinsonism from PSP. Corticobasal ganglionic degeneration and Pick's disease were less difficult to distinguish from PSP. The addition of minimal clinical information contributed to the accuracy of the diagnosis. On the basis of results obtained, we propose clinicopathologic diagnostic criteria to improve on the NINDS criteria.

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 · 10.1097/00005072-199601000-00010

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 475

Metadata

Authors
Litvan, I., Hauw, J. J., Bartko, J. J., Lantos, P. L., Daniel, S. E., Horoupian, D. S., McKee, A., Dickson, D., Bancher, C., Tabaton, M., Jellinger, K., & Anderson, D. W.
Venue
Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology
Published
1996-01
Volume
55
Issue
1
Pages
97-105
ISSN
0022-3069 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094826609
Cited by
475
References
0
FWCI
17.47
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: Validity and Reliability of the Preliminary NINDS Neuropathologic Criteria for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy and Related Disorders. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00005072-199601000-00010
The paper
Litvan, I., Hauw, J. J., Bartko, J. J., Lantos, P. L., Daniel, S. E., Horoupian, D. S., McKee, A., Dickson, D., Bancher, C., Tabaton, M., Jellinger, K., & Anderson, D. W. (1996). Validity and Reliability of the Preliminary NINDS Neuropathologic Criteria for Progressive Supranuclear Palsy and Related Disorders. Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005072-199601000-00010

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.