Validity of the diagnostic criteria for chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency and association with multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency theory proposes that altered cerebral venous hemodynamics play a role in the pathophysiology of multiple sclerosis. We aimed to explore the validity of this hypothesis by assessing the diagnostic criteria for chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency in persons with and without multiple sclerosis. METHODS: We compared the proportion of venous outflow abnormalities between patients with multiple sclerosis and healthy controls using extracranial Doppler ultrasonography and gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance venography. Interpreting radiologists were blinded to the clinical status of participants. RESULTS: We enrolled 120 patients with multiple sclerosis and 60 healthy controls. High proportions of both patients (67/115 [58%]) and controls (38/60 [63%]) met 1 or more of the proposed ultrasound criteria for diagnosis of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (p = 0.6). A minority of patients (23/115 [20%]) and controls (6/60 [10%]) fulfilled 2 or more of the proposed criteria (p = 0.1). There were no differences between patients and controls in the prevalence of each individual ultrasound criterion. Similarly, there were no differences in intracranial or extracranial venous patency between groups, as measured by magnetic resonance venography. INTERPRETATION: We detected no differences in the proportion of venous outflow abnormalities between patients with multiple sclerosis and healthy controls. Moreover, our study revealed significant methodologic concerns regarding the proposed diagnostic criteria for chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency that challenge their validity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".