Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33090270›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurology2021

The course of multiple sclerosis rewritten: a Norwegian population-based study on disease demographics and progression.

Cecilia Smith Simonsen, Heidi Øyen Flemmen, Line Broch, Cathrine Brunborg, Pål Berg-Hansen, Stine Marit Moen, Elisabeth Gulowsen Celius

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. The influence of menopause on multiple sclerosis.European journal of neurology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Data-driven risk/benefit estimator for multiple sclerosis therapies.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Cecilia Smith SimonsenDepartment of Neurology, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Dronninggata, 3004, Drammen, Norway. cecsim@vestreviken.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9408-7199
Heidi Øyen FlemmenDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Telemark HF, Skien, Oslo, Norway.
Line BrochDepartment of Neurology, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Dronninggata, 3004, Drammen, Norway.
Cathrine BrunborgOslo Centre for Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Research Support Services, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Pål Berg-HansenDepartment of Neurology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Stine Marit MoenMS-Centre Hakadal, Grønvoll, Norway.
Elisabeth Gulowsen CeliusDepartment of Neurology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

Sanofi Genzyme (US) GZ-2014-11451
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOver the past few decades, there has been an improvement in the rate of disability progression in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, and most studies relate this evolvement to the introduction of disease-modifying therapies. However, several other factors have changed over this period, including access to MRI and newer diagnostic criteria. The aim of this study is to investigate changes in the natural course of MS over time in a near-complete and geographically well-defined population from the south-east of Norway.

methodsWe examined disease progression and demographics over two decades and assessed the effect of disease-modifying therapies using linear mixed-effect models.

resultsIn a cohort of 2097 patients, we found a significant improvement in disability as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) stratified by age, and the improvement remained significant after adjusting for time on disease-modifying medications, gender and progressive MS at onset. The time from disease onset to EDSS 6 in the total cohort was 29.8 years (95% CI 28.5-31.1) and was significantly longer in patients diagnosed after 2006 compared to patients diagnosed before. There are significant differences between patient demographics, as well as time to EDSS 6, in the near-complete, geographically well-defined population compared to an additional cohort from the capital Oslo and its suburbs.

conclusionThe natural course of MS is improving, but the improvement seen in disease progression has multifaceted explanations. Our study underlines the importance of completeness of data, relevant timeframes and demographics when comparing different MS populations. Studies on incomplete populations should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisMultiple Sclerosis, Chronic ProgressiveDemographyDisability EvaluationDisease ProgressionHumansNorwayDisease courseEpidemiologyMultiple sclerosisNatural historyTime to EDSS 6

Identifiers

PMID33090270
PMCPMC7990804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.