Search

Background: Incidence and prevalence studies of neurological disorders play an extremely important role in hypothesis-generation, assessing the burden of disease and planning of health services. However, the assessment of disease estimates is hindered by the poor quality of reporting for such studies. We developed the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) guideline in order to improve the quality of reporting of neurological disorders from which prevalence, incidence, and outcomes can be extracted for greater generalisability. Methods: The guideline was developed using a 3-round Delphi technique in order to identify the ‘basic minimum items' important for reporting, as well as some additional ‘ideal reporting items.' An e-consultation process was then used in order to gauge opinion by external neuroepidemiological experts on the appropriateness of the items included in the checklist. Findings: The resultant 15 items checklist and accompanying recommendations were developed using a similar process and structured in a similar manner to the Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist for ease of use. This paper presents the STROND checklist with an explanation and elaboration for each item, as well as examples of good reporting from the neuroepidemiological literature. Conclusions: The introduction and use of the STROND checklist should lead to more consistent, transparent and contextualised reporting of descriptive neuroepidemiological studies that should facilitate international comparisons, and lead to more accessible information for multiple stakeholders, ultimately supporting better healthcare decisions for neurological disorders.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Published reports on the association between amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and trauma are controversial suggesting the need for a new case-control study done in a large population. METHODS: A case-control study was undertaken in Italy to assess this association. Cases were patients with newly diagnosed ALS from four population-based registries. For each case, two hospital controls were selected, matched for age, sex, and province of residence, one with a neurological (non-degenerative) disease and one with a non-neurological disease (other than orthopedic or surgical). Traumatic events (defined as accidental events causing injuries requiring medical care) were recorded with details on type, site, timing, severity, and complications. The risks were assessed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), crude and adjusted for age, sex, education, interviewee (patient or surrogate), physical activity, smoking, alcohol, and coffee. RESULTS: The study population comprised 377 patients in each of the three groups. One or more traumatic events were reported by 225 cases (59.7%), 191 neurological controls (50.7%), and 179 non-neurological controls (47.5%) (P

The relation between coffee intake and risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) was investigated in 377 newly diagnosed ALS patients from 4 Italian population-based registries in the European ALS Consortium (EURALS Group) (2007-2010). For each patient, 2 age- and sex-matched hospital controls were selected, one from a neurology department and one from a nonneurologic department. Two additional healthy control groups were identified from local general practitioners' (GPs') lists (n = 99) and residents of the same area as a cancer cohort (n = 7,057). Coffee intake was defined in terms of status (ever consuming coffee daily for ≥6 months vs. never), duration, and history (never, former, or current). Ever coffee drinkers comprised 74.7% of ALS patients, 80.4% of neurologic controls, 85.6% of nonneurologic controls (P = 0.0004), 88.9% of GP controls (P = 0.0038), and 86.0% of cancer cohort controls (P < 0.0001). Current coffee drinkers comprised 60.2% of ALS patients, 70.2% of neurologic controls (P = 0.0294), 76.4% of nonneurologic controls (P < 0.0001), and 82.3% of GP controls (P = 0.0002); duration of intake was ≥30 years for 62.3%, 67.7%, 74.7%, and 72.6%. ALS patients had lower lifetime coffee exposure: Odds ratios were 0.7 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.5, 1.1), 0.6 (95% CI: 0.4, 0.8), and 0.4 (95% CI: 0.2, 0.9) in comparison with neurologic, nonneurologic, and GP controls, respectively. In current (vs. never) coffee drinkers, odds ratios were 0.7 (95% CI: 0.5, 1.0), 0.5 (95% CI: 0.3, 0.7), and 0.4 (95% CI: 0.2, 0.8), respectively. These findings provide epidemiologic evidence of an inverse correlation between coffee intake and ALS risk.