Home › Research › How common it is
How common are the "common" neurologic disorders?
Hirtz D, Thurman DJ, Gwinn-Hardy K, Mohamed M, Chaudhuri AR, Zalutsky R.. Neurology, 2007-01-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Objective To estimate the current incidence and prevalence in the United States of 12 neurologic disorders. Methods We summarize the strongest evidence available, using data from the United States or from other developed countries when US data were insufficient. Results For some disorders, prevalence is a better descriptor of impact; for others, incidence is preferable. Per 1,000 children, estimated prevalence was 5.8 for autism spectrum disorder and 2.4 for cerebral palsy; for Tourette syndrome, the data were insufficient. In the general population, per 1,000, the 1-year prevalence for migraine was 121, 7.1 for epilepsy, and 0.9 for multiple sclerosis. Among the elderly, the prevalence of Alzheimer disease was 67 and that of Parkinson disease was 9.5. For diseases best described by annual incidence per 100,000, the rate for stroke was 183, 101 for major traumatic brain injury, 4.5 for spinal cord injury, and 1.6 for ALS. Conclusions Using the best available data, our survey of a limited number of disorders shows that the burden of neurologic illness affects many millions of people in the United States.
Key findings
- Results For some disorders, prevalence is a better descriptor of impact; for others, incidence is preferable.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Alzheimer's in numbers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 60/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 35 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 60 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies (from PubMed type “Meta-Analysis”) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2007 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 17261678) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 35 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 35 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 60 out of 100. |
| Total | 60 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Hirtz, D., Thurman, D. J., Gwinn-Hardy, K., Mohamed, M., Chaudhuri, A. R., & Zalutsky, R. (2007). How common are the "common" neurologic disorders? Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000252807.38124.a3
Vancouver
Hirtz D, Thurman DJ, Gwinn-Hardy K, Mohamed M, Chaudhuri AR, Zalutsky R. How common are the "common" neurologic disorders? Neurology. 2007. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000252807.38124.a3. PMID: 17261678.
BibTeX
@article{hirtz2007-17261678,
author = {Hirtz, D. and Thurman, D. J. and Gwinn-Hardy, K. and Mohamed, M. and Chaudhuri, A. R. and Zalutsky, R.},
title = {{How common are the "common" neurologic disorders?}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {2007},
doi = {10.1212/01.wnl.0000252807.38124.a3},
pmid = {17261678},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000252807.38124.a3}
}
Related studies in How common it is
Also tagged “hydrocephalus”
73 studies in the library carry the topic tag “hydrocephalus”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 73 tagged studies.