ArticleJournal of neurology2016
Validation of the MG-DIS: a disability assessment for myasthenia gravis.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Ravulizumab on Patient Outcomes and Quality of Life in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis.Patient related outcome measures · 2023Review
- 20 Years of ICF-International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Uses and Applications around the World.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Validation of the Italian version of the Myasthenia Gravis Impairment Index (MGII).Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Expanding the Role of the Pharmacist: Immunoglobulin Therapy and Disease Management in Neuromuscular Disorders.Journal of pharmacy practice · 2022Review
- From Traditional to Targeted Immunotherapy in Myasthenia Gravis: Prospects for Research.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Review
- Measuring Clinical Treatment Response in Myasthenia Gravis.Neurologic clinics · 2018Review
- Validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change of the myasthenia gravis activities of daily living profile in a sample of Italian myasthenic patients.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper is aimed to present the validation of the myasthenia gravis disability assessment (MG-DIS), a MG-specific patient-reported disability outcome measure. Consecutive MG patients were enrolled, followed-up for 12 months and administered the SF-36, the WHO disability assessment schedule (WHODAS 2.0) and the preliminary 31-item MG-DIS addressing impairments and activity limitations. Factor structure and metric properties were assessed. In total, 109 patients were enrolled: 76 were females, mean age 50, mean MG duration 10.4 years, 86 were AChR-positive. The MG-DIS was reduced to 20 items, explaining 70.6 % of the original questionnaire variance, four subscales (generalized impairment-related problems; bulbar function-related problems; mental health and fatigue-related problems; vision-related problems) and an overall disability index. The MG-DIS has good metric properties (Cronbach's alpha ranging between .808 and .930), is stable, showed to be more sensitive than the WHODAS 2.0 and SF-36 to detect group differences and longitudinal changes and was well correlated with the MG-composite (.642). The MG-DIS includes items representing ocular, generalized, bulbar and respiratory symptoms, and is therefore well-built around MG-specific features. MG-DIS can be used in clinical trials as well as in observational or epidemiological studies to characterize patients' disability level and address the amount of improvement in disability. Further studies are needed to explore the possibility of a shorter disability scale.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.