% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{TebartzvanElst:281526,
      author       = {Tebartz van Elst, Ludger and Runge, Kimon and Meyer,
                      Philipp T and Urbach, Horst and Venhoff, Nils and Prüss,
                      Harald},
      title        = {{T}he {N}europsychiatric {C}hecklist for {A}utoimmune
                      {P}sychosis: {A} {N}arrative {R}eview.},
      journal      = {Biological psychiatry},
      volume       = {98},
      number       = {9},
      issn         = {0006-3223},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier Science},
      reportid     = {DZNE-2025-01144},
      pages        = {654 - 669},
      year         = {2025},
      abstract     = {Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is a rapidly evolving topic in
                      both neurology and psychiatry. A recent international
                      consensus article defined criteria for possible, probable,
                      and definite autoimmune psychosis (AP) inspired by the
                      principles established in neurology for the definition of
                      AE. This has stimulated much clinical research on AP but
                      also criticism of the validity of the criteria for possible
                      AP, justifying additional clinical investigations such as
                      lumbar puncture. In clinical practice, it is often difficult
                      to decide how far diagnostic procedures such as lumbar
                      punctures and immunotherapies should go in unclear cases.
                      Against this background, we have 3 aims in this review.
                      First, we summarize and compare the available concepts for
                      the diagnosis of AP in a systematic literature review.
                      Second, we present an overview of typical specific and
                      nonspecific findings that can be obtained in laboratory,
                      electroencephalography, magnetic resonance imaging,
                      cerebrospinal fluid, and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron
                      emission tomography studies in the context of AP. Thirdly,
                      we summarize these findings and present the Neuropsychiatric
                      Checklist for Autoimmune Psychosis as a tool for clinical
                      assessment of the likelihood of AP, with reference to the
                      typical red-flag symptoms and the specific and many
                      unspecific findings that can be identified in additional
                      investigations. We suggest that this instrument may be a
                      useful tool for a comprehensive, possibly uniform, and
                      standardized case assessment in the context of possible AP.},
      subtyp        = {Review Article},
      keywords     = {Humans / Psychotic Disorders: diagnosis / Psychotic
                      Disorders: immunology / Checklist / Encephalitis: diagnosis
                      / Autoimmune Diseases: diagnosis / Autoimmune Diseases of
                      the Nervous System: diagnosis / Hashimoto Disease: diagnosis
                      / Autoantibody (Other) / Autoimmune psychiatric symptoms
                      (Other) / Autoimmune psychosis (Other) / Diagnostics (Other)
                      / Schizophrenia (Other) / Therapy (Other)},
      cin          = {AG Prüß},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-2719)1810003},
      pnm          = {353 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF4-353)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:39987981},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.biopsych.2025.02.889},
      url          = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/281526},
}