↓ Skip to main content

Multimodal evoked potentials for functional quantification and prognosis in multiple sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Multimodal evoked potentials for functional quantification and prognosis in multiple sclerosis
Published in
BMC Neurology, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0608-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xavier Giffroy, Nathalie Maes, Adelin Albert, Pierre Maquet, Jean-Michel Crielaard, Dominique Dive

Abstract

Functional biomarkers able to identify multiple sclerosis (MS) patients at high risk of fast disability progression are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of multimodal (upper and lower limbs motor, visual, lower limbs somatosensory) evoked potentials (EP) to monitor disease course and identify patients exposed to unfavourable evolution. One hundred MS patients were assessed with visual, somatosensory and motor EP and rated on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) at baseline (T0) and about 6 years later (T1). The Spearman correlation (rS) was used to evaluate the relationship between conventional EP scores and clinical findings. Multiple (logistic) regression analysis estimated the predictive value of baseline electrophysiological data for three clinical outcomes: EDSS, annual EDSS progression, and the risk of EDSS worsening. In contrast to longitudinal correlations, cross-sectional correlations between the different EP scores and EDSS were all significant (0.33 ≤ rS < 0.67, p < 0.001). Baseline global EP score and EDSS were highly significant predictors (p < 0.0001) of EDSS progression 6 years later. The baseline global EP score was found to be an independent predictor of the EDSS annual progression rate (p < 0.001), and of the risk of disability progression over time (p < 0.005). Based on a ROC curve determination, we defined a Global EP Score cut off point (17/30) to identify patients at high risk of disability progression illustrated by a positive predictive value of 70 %. This study provides a proof of the concept that electrophysiology could be added to MRI and used as another complementary prognostic tool in MS patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 21 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 24%
Neuroscience 16 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Engineering 3 4%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 23 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,264,928
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,222
of 2,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,636
of 339,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#26
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,439 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 339,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.