CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsPolyomavirus and related diseases

Evaluation of the 2010 McDonald multiple sclerosis criteria in children with a clinically isolated syndrome

Open access
Kornek, Barbara, Schmitl, Beate, Vass, Karl, Zehetmayer, Sonja, Pritsch, Martin, Penzien, Johann, Karenfort, Michael, Blaschek, Astrid +3 more·2012·Multiple Sclerosis Journal
DOI 10.1177/1352458512444661
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging diagnostic criteria for paediatric multiple sclerosis have been established on the basis of brain imaging findings alone. The 2010 McDonald criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, however, include spinal cord imaging for detection of lesion dissemination in space. The new criteria have been recommended in paediatric multiple sclerosis. Objective: (1) To evaluate the 2010 McDonald multiple sclerosis criteria in children with a clinically isolated syndrome and to compare them with recently proposed magnetic resonance criteria for children; (2) to assess whether the inclusion of spinal cord imaging provided additional value to the 2010 McDonald criteria. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of brain and spinal cord magnetic resonance imaging scans from 52 children with a clinically isolated syndrome. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the magnetic resonance criteria were assessed. Results and conclusion: The 2010 McDonald dissemination in space criteria were more sensitive (85% versus 74%) but less specific (80% versus 100%) compared to the 2005 McDonald criteria. The Callen criteria were more accurate (89%) compared to the 2010 McDonald (85%), the 2005 McDonald criteria for dissemination in space (81%), the KIDMUS criteria (46%) and the Canadian Pediatric Demyelinating Disease Network criteria (76%). The 2010 McDonald criteria for dissemination in time were more accurate (93%) than the dissemination in space criteria (85%). Inclusion of the spinal cord did not increase the accuracy of the McDonald criteria.

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 · 10.1177/1352458512444661

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Spinal MRI appears less useful in the diagnosis of MS in children.

    “Spinal MRI appears less useful in the diagnosis of MS in children. 34”

    From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria (2018) · cites this paper as [34]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that enhancing lesions were less common in the spinal cord than in the brain, which lends limited support to the comparison. But it also says spinal cord imaging may help in unclear diagnostic cases; the passages do not establish that spinal MRI is generally less useful for diagnosing MS in children. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • 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 [34]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. McDonald WI, Compston A, Edan G, et al. Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001; 50: 121-127.
  2. Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the 'McDonald Crite- ria'. Ann Neurol 2005; 58: 840-846.
  3. Mikaeloff Y, Adamsbaum C, Husson B, et al. MRI prognostic factors for relapse after acute CNS inflammatory demyelin- ation in childhood. Brain 2004; 127: 1942-1947.
  4. Hahn CD, Shroff MM, Blaser S, et al. MRI criteria for mul- tiple sclerosis: evaluation in a pediatric cohort. Neurology 2004; 62: 806-808.
  5. Neuteboom RF, Boon M, Catsman Berrevoets CE, et al. Prog- nostic factors after a first attack of inflammatory CNS demy- elination in children. Neurology 2008; 71: 967-973.
  6. Callen DJA, Shroff MM, Branson HM, et al. MRI in the diag- nosis of pediatric multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2009; 72: 961-967.
  7. Ketelslegers IA, Neuteboom RF, Boon M, et al. on behalf of the Dutch Pediatric MS Study Group. A comparison of MRI criteria for diagnosing pediatric ADEM and MS. Neurology 2010; 74: 1412-1415.
  8. Verhey LH, Branson HM, Shroff MM, et al. for the Canadian Pediatric Demyelinating Disease Network. MRI parameters for prediction of multiple sclerosis diagnosis in children with acute CNS demyelination: a prospective national cohort study. Lan- cet Neurol 2011; 10: 1065-1073.
  9. Polman CH, Reingold SC, Banwell B, et al. Diagnostic cri- teria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 Revisions to the McDonald Criteria. Ann Neurol 2011; 69: 292-302.
  10. Swanton JK, Fernando K, Dalton CM, et al. Modification of MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis in patients with clini- cally isolated syndromes. J Neurol Neurosur PS 2006; 77: 830-833.
  11. Swanton JK, Rovira A, Tintore M, et al. MRI criteria for mul- tiple sclerosis in patients presenting with clinically isolated syndromes: a multicentre retrospective study. Lancet Neurol 2007; 6: 677-686.
  12. Verhey LH, Branson HM, Makhija M, et al. Magnetic reso- nance imaging features of the spinal cord in pediatric mul- tiple sclerosis: a preliminary study. Neuroradiology 2010; 52: 1153-1162.
  13. Krupp LB, Banwell B and Tenembaum S. Consensus defi- nitions proposed for pediatric multiple sclerosis and related disorders. Neurology 2007; 68: S7-S12.
  14. Banwell B, Tenembaum S, Lennon VA, et al. Neuromyelitis optica-IgG in childhood inflammatory demyelinating CNS disorders. Neurology 2008; 70: 3444-3452.
  15. Kurztke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclero- sis: an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444-1452.
  16. Barkhof F, Filippi M, Miller DH, et al. Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain 1997; 120: 2059-2069.
  17. Tintore M, Rovira A, Martinez M, et al. Isolated demyelinat- ing syndromes: comparison of different MR imaging criteria to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21: 702-706.
  18. Waubant E, Chabas D, Okuda DT, et al. Difference in disease burden and acticity in pediatric patients on brain magnetic resonance imaging at time of multiple sclerosis onset versus adults. Arch Neurol 2009; 66: 967-971.
  19. Ghassemi R, Antel SB, Narayanan S, et al., on behalf of the Canadian Pediatric Demyelinating Disease Study Group. Lesion distribution in children with clinically isolated syn- dromes. Ann Neurol 2008; 63: 401-405.
  20. Neuteboom RF, Kelelslegers IA, Boon M, et al. Barkhof magnetic resonance imaging criteria predict early relapse in pediatric multiple sclerosis. Pediatr Neurol 2010; 42: 53-55.
  21. Filippi M, Wolinsky JS, Sormani MP, et al. Enhancement fre- quency decreases with increasing age in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2001; 56: 422-423.
  22. Balassy C, Bernert G, Wöber-Bingöl C, et al. Long-term MRI observations of childhood-onset relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Neuropediatrics 2001; 32: 28-37.
  23. O'Riordan JI, Losseff NA, Phatouros C, et al. Asymptomatic spinal cord lesions in clinically isolated optic nerve, brain stem, and spinal cord syndromes suggestive of demyelination. J Neurol Neurosur PS 1998; 64: 353-357.
  24. Lycklama à Nijeholt GJ, van Walderveen MA, Castelijns JA, et al. Brain and spinal cord abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: correlation between MRI parameters, clinical subtypes and symptoms. Brain 1998; 121: 687-697.
  25. Bot JCJ, Barkhof F, Polman CH, et al. Spinal cord abnormali- ties in recently diagnosed MS patients. Added value of spinal MRI examinations. Neurology 2004; 62: 226-233.
  26. Thorpe JW, Kidd D, Mosely IF, et al. Serial gadolinium- enhanced MRI of the brain and spinal cord in early-relaps- ing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1996; 46: 373-378.
  27. Silver NC, Good CD, Sormani MP, et al. A modified pro- tocol to improve the detection of enhancing brain and spi- nal cord lesions in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2001; 248: 215-224.
  28. Losseff NA, Webb SL, O'Riordan JI, et al. Spinal cord atro- phy and disability in multiple sclerosis: a new reproducible and sensitive MRI method with potential to monitor disease progression. Brain 1996; 119: 701-708.
  29. Sedani S, Lim MJ, Hemingway C, et al. Paediatric multiple sclerosis: examining the utility of the McDonald 2010 crite- ria. Mult Scler 19 October 2011 [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1177/135248511426815. · DOI
  30. Rovira A, Swanton J, Tintore M, et al. A single, early mag- netic resonance imaging study in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2009; 5: 287-292.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kornek, B., Schmitl, B., Vass, K., Zehetmayer, S., Pritsch, M., Penzien, J., Karenfort, M., Blaschek, A., Seidl, R., Prayer, D., & Rostasy, K.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • DRK-Children’s Hospital Siegen, Germany
  • University Hospital Augsburg (DE)
  • Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Innsbruck Medical University (AT)
ORCID
Venue
Multiple Sclerosis Journal
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2012-04-23
Volume
18
Issue
12
Pages
1768-1774
ISSN
  • 1352-4585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0970
DOI
10.1177/1352458512444661
OpenAlex
W2102473502
Cited by
39
References
1
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Multiple Sclerosis Journal (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 › Oncology › Polyomavirus and related diseases
Keywords
pediatric multiple sclerosis, clinically isolated syndrome, dissemination in space, dissemination in time, spinal cord MRI, brain MRI, diagnostic accuracy, children
MeSH terms
Brain, Child, Demyelinating Diseases, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Multiple Sclerosis, Pediatrics, Retrospective Studies, Sensitivity and Specificity, Spinal Cord

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