Diagnosing multiple sclerosis: implementation and unintended effects of the 2024 McDonald criteria

Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis have evolved substantially since the Schumacher criteria were published in 1965. The most recent iteration, the 2024 McDonald diagnostic criteria, was recently released. Each revision has broadened the range of evidence that can support diagnosis while attempting to preserve specificity. The central question raised by the 2024 revision is therefore not simply whether the criteria are valid in principle, but whether they can be applied safely outside expert centres, where imaging quality, laboratory infrastructure and subspecialist interpretation vary substantially. In this review, we evaluate the 2024 criteria not only as a consensus document but as an intervention in clinical behaviour, with particular attention to misdiagnosis risk, operational feasibility and equity of implementation. In particular, we consider the role of the optic nerve and of the central vein sign and paramagnetic rim lesions in diagnosis, and how the criteria bring more diverse populations and presentations into consideration. We also review how the greater options available to achieve a diagnosis may introduce heterogeneity into diagnostic approaches, and what safeguards can be taken to minimise the risk of inappropriate application of the criteria and subsequent misdiagnosis (and inappropriate treatment). The review finishes by proposing how the changes introduced in this iteration might be refined, with more robust definitions on acquiring and interpreting the novel biomarkers.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Brain
Published
2026-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awag293
Primary Topic
Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Diagnosing multiple sclerosis: implementation and unintended effects of the 2024 McDonald criteria

Michael A. Foster, Klaus Schmierer, Helen L Ford, Charles Wade
Brain
Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
article

Diagnosing multiple sclerosis: implementation and unintended effects of the 2024 McDonald criteria

Michael A. Foster, Klaus Schmierer, Helen L Ford, Charles Wade
article en

Abstract

Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis have evolved substantially since the Schumacher criteria were published in 1965. The most recent iteration, the 2024 McDonald diagnostic criteria, was recently released. Each revision has broadened the range of evidence that can support diagnosis while attempting to preserve specificity. The central question raised by the 2024 revision is therefore not simply whether the criteria are valid in principle, but whether they can be applied safely outside expert centres, where imaging quality, laboratory infrastructure and subspecialist interpretation vary substantially. In this review, we evaluate the 2024 criteria not only as a consensus document but as an intervention in clinical behaviour, with particular attention to misdiagnosis risk, operational feasibility and equity of implementation. In particular, we consider the role of the optic nerve and of the central vein sign and paramagnetic rim lesions in diagnosis, and how the criteria bring more diverse populations and presentations into consideration. We also review how the greater options available to achieve a diagnosis may introduce heterogeneity into diagnostic approaches, and what safeguards can be taken to minimise the risk of inappropriate application of the criteria and subsequent misdiagnosis (and inappropriate treatment). The review finishes by proposing how the changes introduced in this iteration might be refined, with more robust definitions on acquiring and interpreting the novel biomarkers.

Brain
Barking, Havering And Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), Leeds General Infirmary (GB), University of Leeds (GB), University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Queen Mary University of London (GB), Barts Health NHS Trust (GB), Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), University College London (GB)
National Institute for Health and Care Research, Medical Research Council, Health Technology Assessment Programme
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.