↓ Skip to main content

Real world prognosis in MS: does early versus late diagnosis matter?

Overview of attention for article published in Neurological Research, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

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.
Article details
Title
Real world prognosis in MS: does early versus late diagnosis matter?
Published in
Neurological Research, January 2021
DOI 10.1080/01616412.2020.1867947
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) often presents soon after the onset of a recognized clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). In order to interpret data from CIS trials, it is important to know whether patients presenting as classical CIS provide group data representative of RRMS. We aimed to determine whether or not MS patients presenting soon after the onset of symptoms with clinically isolated syndromes have an identifiable clinical profile, including worse outcomes, versus MS patients presenting later. Chart review of consecutive patients with newly diagnosed relapsing MS, diagnosed in our clinic between 1989 and 2005. We divided patients into an early presentation group (EP), versus the remaining late presenting group (LP), and analyzed the impact of delay in presentation on 10- and 15-year disability outcomes. We also sought to identify reasons for later presentation. The two groups were similar in terms of many demographics, clinical risk factors, and long-term disability outcomes (median EDSS 2.25 versus EDSS 2.0 at 10 years). Exceptionally, patients in the EP group had more frequent attacks in the first few years after onset and were diagnosed and treated earlier. Patients in our MS clinic with EP versus LP were more likely to have multiple attacks in the first 2 years after onset and were treated earlier, but did not have a better 10- or 15-year outcome.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

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.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 23%
Other 2 15%
Professor 1 8%
Student > Master 1 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 31%
Neuroscience 2 15%
Unknown 7 54%
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 14 January 2021.
All research outputs
#18,782,494
of 23,274,744 outputs
Outputs from Neurological Research
#687
of 913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#377,965
of 505,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurological Research
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,274,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 913 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 505,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.