Cited by 845Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus

A consensus protocol for the standardization of cerebrospinal fluid collection and biobanking

Open access
Teunissen, C. E., Petzold, A., Bennett, J. L., Berven, F. S., Brundin, L., Comabella, M., Franciotta, D., Frederiksen, J. L. +18 more·2009·Neurology

Abstract

There is a long history of research into body fluid biomarkers in neurodegenerative and neuroinflammatory diseases. However, only a few biomarkers in CSF are being used in clinical practice. One of the most critical factors in CSF biomarker research is the inadequate powering of studies because of the lack of sufficient samples that can be obtained in single-center studies. Therefore, collaboration between investigators is needed to establish large biobanks of well-defined samples. Standardized protocols for biobanking are a prerequisite to ensure that the statistical power gained by increasing the numbers of CSF samples is not compromised by preanalytical factors. Here, a consensus report on recommendations for CSF collection and biobanking is presented, formed by the BioMS-eu network for CSF biomarker research in multiple sclerosis. We focus on CSF collection procedures, preanalytical factors, and high-quality clinical and paraclinical information. The biobanking protocols are applicable for CSF biobanks for research targeting any neurologic disease.

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 · 10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181c47cc2

Cites

48 of 48 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?

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: 1

  1. Jimenez CR, Koel-Simmelink MJR, Pham T, Voort van der L, Teunissen CE. Endogenous peptide profiling of ce- rebrospinal fluid by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Proteomics Clin Appl 2007;1:1385-1392.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Teunissen, C. E., Petzold, A., Bennett, J. L., Berven, F. S., Brundin, L., Comabella, M., Franciotta, D., Frederiksen, J. L., Fleming, J. O., Furlan, R., Hintzen, M., Hughes, S. G., Johnson, M. H., Krasulova, E., Kuhle, J., Magnone, M. C., Rajda, C., Rejdak, K., Schmidt, H. K., van Pesch, V., Waubant, E., Wolf, C., Giovannoni, G., Hemmer, B., Tumani, H., & Deisenhammer, F.
Affiliations
  • Karolinska University Hospital (SE)
  • From Department of Molecular Cell Biology and Immunology (C.E.T.), VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Neuroimmunology (A.P.), UCL Institute of Neurology, Queen Square, London, UK; Departments of Neurology and Ophthalmology (J.L.B.), University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, CO; Institute of Medicine (F.S.B.), University of Bergen, Norway; Department of Clinical Neuroscience (L.B.), Division of Neurology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Neurology ...
Venue
Neurology
Published
2009-12
Volume
73
Issue
22
Pages
1914-1922
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W1994723621
Cited by
845
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 51 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 71 · 2022: 87 · 2021: 68 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 28
FWCI
17.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  • National Multiple Sclerosis Society
  • Pfizer
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Sanofi
  • Biogen
  • Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
  • Université Catholique de Louvain
  • Union Chimique Belge
  • Multiple Sclerosis Society
  • European Commission
  • Ministero della Salute
  • Karolinska Institutet
  • Universität Ulm
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Genentech
  • EMD Serono
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Eye Institute (R03EY014573)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Keywords
cerebrospinal fluid, biobanking, pre-analytical variables, sample standardization, neurodegenerative diseases, neuroinflammatory diseases, multiple sclerosis, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers
MeSH terms
Disability Evaluation, England, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Multiple Sclerosis, Severity of Illness Index, Specimen Handling, Biomarkers, Databases, Bibliographic, Biological Specimen Banks, Consensus

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