MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886429717 · doi:10.1111/jon.12553

Spinal Cord Atrophy in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2018· review· en· W2886429717 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroimaging · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalWestern University
FundersMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
KeywordsMedicineMultiple sclerosisInternal medicineAtrophyMeta-analysisCohortExpanded Disability Status ScaleInclusion and exclusion criteriaGastroenterologyPathologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Spinal cord atrophy (SCA) is an important emerging outcome measure in multiple sclerosis (MS); however, there is limited consensus on the magnitude and rate of atrophy. The objective of this study was to synthesize the available data on measures of SCA in MS. METHODS Using published guidelines, relevant literature databases were searched between 1977 and 2017 for case‐control or cohort studies reporting a quantitative measure of SCA in MS patients. Random‐effects models pooled cross‐sectional measures and longitudinal rates of SCA in MS and healthy controls (HCs). Student's t ‐test assessed differences between pooled measures in patient subgroups. Heterogeneity was assessed using DerSimonian and Laird's Q ‐test and the I 2 ‐index. RESULTS A total of 1,465 studies were retrieved including 94 that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pooled estimates of mean cervical spinal cord (SC) cross‐sectional area (CSA) in all MS patients, relapsing‐remitting MS (RRMS), all progressive MS, secondary progressive MS (SPMS), primary‐progressive MS (PPMS), and HC were: 73.07 mm 2 (95% CI [71.52‐74.62]), 78.88 mm 2 (95% CI [76.92‐80.85]), 69.72 mm 2 (95% CI [67.96‐71.48]), 68.55 mm 2 (95% CI [65.43‐71.66]), 70.98 mm 2 (95% CI [68.78‐73.19]), and 80.87 mm 2 (95% C I [78.70‐83.04]), respectively. Pooled SC‐CSA was greater in HC versus MS ( P < .001) and RRMS versus progressive MS ( P < .001). SCA showed moderate correlations with global disability in cross‐sectional studies ( r ‐value with disability score range [−.75 to −.22]). In longitudinal studies, the pooled annual rate of SCA was 1.78%/year (95%CI [1.28‐2.27]). CONCLUSIONS The SC is atrophied in MS. The magnitude of SCA is greater in progressive versus relapsing forms and correlates with clinical disability. The pooled estimate of annual rate of SCA is greater than reported rates of brain atrophy in MS. These results demonstrate that SCA is highly relevant as an imaging outcome in MS clinical trials.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.338
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.090 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it