Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 10, 2025

A Computer-Based Platform for Aiding Clinicians in Eating Disorder Analysis and Diagnosis
Published on: May 10, 2022
Real-Life Evaluation of the MOGAD Diagnostic Criteria: Application Challenges and Discrepancies
Sara Carta1, Elia Sechi2, Alessandro Dinoto1
1Neurology Unit, Department of Neurosciences, Biomedicine, and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Italy.
Background And Objectives:
Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) international panel criteria have been recently proposed to guide MOGAD diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the criteria performance and assess the discrepancies in their application in the clinical practice in an Italian multicenter cohort and to discuss some challenging aspects.
Methods:
We applied the 2023 MOGAD criteria to patients who tested MOG-Abs positive on cell-based assays and were retrospectively recruited from 29 centers. Detailed clinical and paraclinical data were collected. Patients were classified as true positive/negative (TP/TN) in case of concordance between MOGAD criteria application and enrolling center final diagnosis, as false positive (FP) when MOGAD criteria were fulfilled but final diagnosis was different from MOGAD, and as false negative (FN) when MOGAD criteria were not fulfilled and final diagnosis of MOGAD was confirmed. Central revision of FN and FP cases was performed.
Results:
We included 214 patients (median age at onset 38.2 years [interquartile range 25.2-50.7], 60.3% female, 23 pediatric patients). Of these, 168 (78.5%) were classified as TP, 9 (4.2%) as FP, 23 (10.7%) as FN, and 14 (6.5%) as TN. The sensitivity of MOGAD criteria was 87.96% (CI 82.5%-92.2%), specificity 60.9% (CI 38.5%-80.3%), positive predictive value 94.9% (CI 91.8%-96.9%), negative predictive value 37.8% (CI 26.7%-50.2%), and accuracy 85.1% (CI 79.6%-89.5%). In 11 of 32 revised cases, available information did not allow a proper diagnosis. Independent revision changed the diagnosis in 17 of 21 remaining cases, increasing the performance of the MOGAD criteria. Of note, in 3 cases, diagnostic criteria were satisfied only at follow-up. The sensitivity and specificity after independent revision were 98.9% (CI 96%-99.9%) and 91.7% (CI 73%-98.9%), respectively. Moreover, 29 of 214 patients (13.6%) had 1 or more asymptomatic radiologic supportive features, and in 50% (3/6) of FP cases, independent revision did not confirm the presence of supportive features. Patients with clear positive serum titer or CSF-only MOG-Abs were those who received more commonly a MOGAD diagnosis.
Discussion:
MOGAD criteria demonstrate a good performance across different centers; however, controversial cases might benefit from collegial discussion and reassessment of MOGAD criteria during the follow-up. Main challenges include availability of proper radiologic data and interpretation of radiologic supportive features.
More Related Videos
10:58Multimedia Battery for Assessment of Cognitive and Basic Skills in Mathematics BM-PROMA
Published on: August 28, 2021
09:00Author Spotlight: Validation of SICOLE-R for Assessing Cognitive and Reading Skills in Spanish-Speaking Children and Its Role in Personalized Education
Published on: August 16, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)
Documentation of Nursing Diagnosis
In some settings, data-driven computerized decision support systems are in place, allowing for more accurate nursing diagnoses. The database within one of these systems includes diagnostic labels defining characteristics, activities, and indicators for nursing. A nurse enters...
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis II
Risk nursing diagnoses represent clinical judgments of an individual, family, or community more vulnerable to developing the health problem than others...
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis I
There are thirteen domains...
Irritable Bowel Syndrome II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Evaluation
Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) is classified into subtypes based on the predominant bowel habits as determined by the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS). The subtypes are:
Methods of Documentation II: POMR