↓ Skip to main content

Cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal IgM test in routine practice: Comparison with quantitative assessment of intrathecal IgM synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinica Chimica Acta, May 2020
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal IgM test in routine practice: Comparison with quantitative assessment of intrathecal IgM synthesis
Published in
Clinica Chimica Acta, May 2020
DOI 10.1016/j.cca.2020.05.021
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Zeman, Pavlína Kušnierová, František Všianský, Katarína Reguliová, Monika Škutová, Ivana Woznicová, Olga Zapletalová, Pavel Hradílek

Abstract

Intrathecal IgM synthesis demonstrated either as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-restricted oligoclonal (o-) IgM bands or calculated using various formulas has been linked to more aggressive multiple sclerosis (MS) course. However, the proportion of MS patients showing intrathecal IgM synthesis varies largely between studies. We aimed to explore the relation between different formulas and results of o-IgM, and to assess the frequency of o-IgM bands in an unselected series of samples. 432 samples were analyzed for o-IgM, o-IgG and quantitative measures of IgM and IgG synthesis. IgM index and formulas of Reiber, Auer and Öhman were compared to the result of the o-IgM test. At the cut-off commonly used, the non-linear formulas for intrathecal synthesis were specific (>94%) but rather insensitive (<40% even at a cut-off of 4 CSF-restricted bands) compared to o-IgM. No significant difference was noted in the performance of different formulas. At a cut-off of 4 bands, 61 % of MS patients, but none of the controls were positive for o-IgM. Formulas for intrathecal IgM synthesis are insensitive compared to o-IgM. We propose to evaluate samples with 2 or 3 extra-CSF IgM bands as borderline and only samples with 4 or more as definitely positive.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Student > Master 2 15%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Professor 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Unknown 2 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 4 31%
Arts and Humanities 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2020.
All research outputs
#20,667,544
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Clinica Chimica Acta
#3,557
of 4,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#326,270
of 424,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinica Chimica Acta
#54
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,795 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,107 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.