ArticleSouthern medical journal2019
Summary of Selected Healthcare Encounters among a Selection of Patients with Myotonic Muscular Dystrophy.
Article in Southern medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Societal Costs, Healthcare Utilisation and Labour Market Affiliation of Persons With Adult-Onset Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1 (DM1)-A Register-Based Study II.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Healthcare resource utilization, total costs, and comorbidities among patients with myotonic dystrophy using U.S. insurance claims data from 2012 to 2019.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveResearch has not examined the use of health care by patients with myotonic muscular dystrophy (MMD), but it would provide insights into this population, which is prone to comorbidities and high service needs. This study is an analysis of this understudied subgroup, using a unique linked dataset to examine the characteristics and healthcare utilization patterns for people with MMD.
methodsThis analysis used 3 South Carolina datasets (2009-2014). The subjects included individuals with at least 1 encounter with an
resultsThe subjects were predominately female, white, and 45 to 64 years old. A total of 44.6% of the study population had at least 1 inpatient visit, whereas 64.2% had at least 1 emergency department visit. A majority of the subjects had at least 1 office visit (55.0%), and most (85.3%) did not have a home health encounter.
conclusionsInvestigation of the reasons for these inpatient and emergency department encounters may be helpful in identifying ways to deliver high-quality care.
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.