MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MOG-Ab prevalence in optic neuritis and clinical predictive factors for diagnosis

2019· article· en· W2977584077 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Baptiste Ducloyer, Angélique Caignard, Ramzi Aidaoui, Yolaine Ollivier, Guillaume Plubeau, Sonia Santos-Moskalyk, Lindsay Porphyre, Caroline Le Jeune, Lionel Bihl, Samy Alamine, Romain Marignier, Romain Bourcier, Mathilde Ducloyer, Michel Weber, Guylène Le Meur, Sandrine Wiertlewski, Pierre Lebranchu

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Ophthalmology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOptic neuritisClinically isolated syndromeMultiple sclerosisMyelin oligodendrocyte glycoproteinInternal medicineGastroenterologyProspective cohort studyPediatricsSurgeryImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective What is the proportion of antibodies to myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG-Ab) in optic neuritis (ON) in adults and what would be the ON presentation for which MOG-Ab should be tested? Methods Multicentric prospective study conducted during 1 year on all patients diagnosed with acute ON in all ophthalmological units in hospitals in a region in western France. Results Sixty-five patients were included. MOG-Ab prevalence was 14% (9/65) during an acute ON and 13% (7/55) after exclusion of patients already diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) (8) or MOG+ON (2). Compared with MS and clinically isolated syndrome, MOG+ON had no female preponderance (67% of men in case of MOG+ON and 22% of men in case of MS and clinically isolated syndrome, p<0.05) were more often bilateral (44% vs 3%, p < 0.005) and associated with optic disc swelling (ODS) (78% vs 14%, p < 0.001). To predict MOG+ON, the positive predictive values (PPVs) of male sex, ODS and bilateral involvement were 29% (95% CI 9% to 48%), 41% (95% CI 18% to 65%) and 40% (95% CI 10% to 70%), respectively, while the negative predictive values (NPV) were 93% (95% CI 86% to 100%), 96% (95% CI 90% to 100%) and 91% (95% CI 83% to 99%), respectively. The combined factor ‘ODS or bilateral or recurrent ON’ was the best compromise between PPV (31% (95% CI 14% to 48%)) and NPV (100% (95% CI 100% to 100%)). Conclusion Among ON episodes, MOG-Ab were found in 14% of cases. MOG+ON occurred without female preponderance and was significantly associated with ODS and/or bilateral ON. Testing MOG-Ab only in patients presenting with ODS or bilateral or recurrent ON would limit MOG-Ab tests to fewer than half of all patients without the risk of missing any MOG+ON cases.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of OphthalmologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207