McDonald criteria & Differtial Diagnosis

If it's on your mind and it has to do with multiple sclerosis in any way, post it here.
Post Reply
User avatar
CureOrBust
Family Elder
Posts: 3374
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:00 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

McDonald criteria & Differtial Diagnosis

Post by CureOrBust »

I have recently been noticing that a lot of published papers talk of participants being included via the McDonald criteria, which is considered the "gold standard" for diagnosing MS. So I went and brushed up on exactly what the meant.

Looking at the McDonald criteria, there is no reference to testing for differential diagnosis. :?

Does that mean that these studies could be including people who have only met the McDonald criteria and have not had any tests to exclude a differential diagnosis that would present and satisfy the McDonald criteria?
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
Posts: 12592
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

Post by jimmylegs »

is mcdonald the one that has that bit about 'lack of any other explanation'? i think that's what they mean by doing differential dx stuff but i haven't looked into it in a while...
User avatar
CureOrBust
Family Elder
Posts: 3374
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:00 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by CureOrBust »

I found the fulltext, I will read it tomorrow. :oops:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi- ... 0/PDFSTART

I did a quick scan and it appears to say "if nothing better explains the presentation, then it is MS".

If that's as far as it goes, it's a little loose for my likings, as it depends on the person making the diagnosis, and how thorough they feel is appropriate. But, I will read and see.
User avatar
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
Posts: 12592
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 3:00 pm

Post by jimmylegs »

it's VERY loose. so are the rest of the criteria in my opinion.
Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General Discussion”