MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406827363 · doi:10.1177/13524585251313744

Testing for myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies: Who, what, where, when, why, and how

2025· review· en· W4406827363 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Budhram, Eoin P. Flanagan

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisMyelin oligodendrocyte glycoproteinMedicineAntibodyImmunologyCerebrospinal fluidOligodendrocyteImmunoglobulin GDiseaseDemyelinating diseaseMyelinPathologyCentral nervous systemInternal medicineExperimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Testing for myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein immunoglobulin G antibodies (MOG-IgG) is essential to the diagnosis of MOG antibody-associated disease (MOGAD). Due to its central role in the evaluation of suspected inflammatory demyelinating disease, the last 5 years has been marked by an abundance of research into MOG-IgG testing ranging from appropriate patient selection, to assay performance, to utility of serum titers as well as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing. In this review, we synthesize current knowledge pertaining to the "who, what, where, when, why, and how" of MOG-IgG testing, with the aim of facilitating accurate MOGAD diagnosis in clinical practice.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207