Table 1.

Methodologic characteristics of studies following MS suspects for the development of CDMS

Author (year)Patients, nMonths of FU, mean (range)Patients developing CDMS, %Mean age, yGender, % femaleSpectrum of disease, nCDMS criteriaCohort assemblyClass
FU = follow-up; CDMS = clinically definite MS; ON = optic neuritis; Poss = possible; Prob = probable; LSDMS = laboratory-supported definite MS.
Frederiksen et al. (1996, 1991)12,134812 (8–18)16.63360Isolated ONNot describedAll patients with new-onset ON within defined regionIV
Filippini et al. (1994)148234.834.127.566Isolated ON, 21; Poss MS, 34; Prob MS, 27McDonald and Halliday24Consecutive patients from prospective multicenter MS studyII
Lee et al. (1991, 1988)4,518425.229.94367Suspected MS, 100; LSDMS, 84Schumacher et al.1Consecutive referrals to participating neurologists and MS centersII
Martinelli et al. (1991)173732 (12–74)18.929Not describedIsolated ONNot describedConsecutive referrals from defined regionIV
Hume and Waxman (1988)1822230 (12–56)22.43366Isolated ON, 26; single lesion, 83; Poss MS, 110; Prob MS, 29McAlpine23Consecutive referrals of MS suspects for evoked potentialsII
Hamburger et al. (1984)19963651Not described67Leg symptoms, 50; blurred vision, 45Poser et al.2Patients referred with symptoms suggestive of MSIV
Deltenre et al. (1982)2013317.6 (2–51.6)33.1Not describedNot describedPoss MS; Prob MSMcDonald and Halliday24Not describedIV
Bottcher and Trojaborg (1982)2121(19–49)42.9Not described62Poss MS; Prob MSMcDonald and Halliday24Not describedIV
Matthews et al. (1982)226930 (6–38)40.63864Single lesion; poss MS; prob MS; ON excludedMcAlpine23Consecutive referrals of MS suspects for evoked potentialsII