Toward a global research agenda for preventing multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Considerable progress has been made in understanding genetic and environmental risk factors for multiple sclerosis (MS), yet we still cannot prevent MS. OBJECTIVES: To drive progress in primary and secondary prevention of MS by developing a comprehensive research agenda based on current knowledge. METHODS: A global workshop convened people with lived experience, clinicians, researchers, and policymakers with expertise in MS, other chronic diseases, epidemiology, clinical trials, genomics, immunology, virology, behavioral science, and public health to develop pathways to advance the MS prevention agenda. RESULTS: Regarding primary prevention, workshop participants recommended acting on known modifiable risk factors; identifying novel etiological factors and determining how they lead to disease; and building coalitions including organizations with shared interests. Regarding secondary prevention, workshop participants recommended identifying biomarkers relevant from initial immune dysregulation through to initial clinical presentation, linking biomarkers to long-term MS outcomes, developing cost-effective screening tools for MS and point-of-care testing, and developing prodromal criteria for MS that could be implemented clinically. Communication and evaluation frameworks, adoption of an implementation mind-set, and engagement of public health were highlighted as key supporting elements. CONCLUSION: This workshop sets the stage for developing a global prevention agenda for MS.
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".