Page 1 of 1

McDonald criteria & Differtial Diagnosis

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:24 am
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?

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:44 am
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...

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:30 am
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.

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:06 am
by jimmylegs
it's VERY loose. so are the rest of the criteria in my opinion.