McDonald criteria and limboland

I read the Ask the Doctor forum on the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation website periodically. There are often interesting bits of info.

Anyway, one of the doctors said today in response to a question from someone questioning an MS dx:

"The McDonald criteria were written to have a high degree of specificity for MS. So, if you meet the criteria, MS is exceedingly likely. They were written with a lower degree of sensitivity. So, some people with MS may not meet the full criteria. This is probably most true for the MRI portion. If a person is accumulating new lesions on MRI, this may push the neurologist more towards the diagnosis of MS."

http://www.msfacts.org/dcforum/DCForumID1/4604.html

I just thought people mind find that interesting. It seems like a lot of neuros don't look at things way.

sho

[essdipity]

Thanks. This is certainly food for thought and another way of looking at things.

ess

[Quixotic1]

Thanks so much for this!  I have been trying to say this for... forever.  If you fulfill the requirements for MS you VERY likely have it.  But, if you don't fulfill the requirements, especially in the MRI part, it is not as likely that you don't have MS.  There are more false-negatives.

Just the accumulation of lesions is evidence, according to this doctor, of a higher likelihood of MS.

This is why arbitrary rules about who has it and who doesn't are just idiocy.

Quix