ReviewJournal of neurology2022
Bedside and laboratory diagnostic testing in myasthenia.
Review in Journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of Repetitive Ocular Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials to Diagnose Myasthenia Gravis in Patients With Ptosis or Diplopia.Neurology · 2024Trial
- Thymoma Type B2 Associated with Myasthenia Gravis Presenting as Progressive Respiratory Distress: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance and safety of the edrophonium test in myasthenia gravis: a retrospective case-control study.Neurological research and practice · 2026Article
- Miller Fisher Variant of Guillain-Barré Syndrome Presenting With Dysphagia and Ophthalmoplegia.Cureus · 2026Article
- Facile and label-free electrochemical detection of myasthenia gravis-associated AChR antibodies using a laser-induced graphene immunoplatform.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Article
- Cavernous Sinus Dural Arteriovenous Fistula Initially Misdiagnosed As Ocular Myasthenia Gravis: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Electrodiagnostic criteria for neuromuscular transmission disorders suggested by a European consensus group.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2025Article
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Myopathy: The Double-Edged Sword of Cancer Immunotherapy.Neurology · 2024Review
- Saccadic fatigue as an early indicator for diagnosing myasthenia gravis.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes of small cell lung cancer.Postepy psychiatrii neurologii · 2024Review
- MuSK Myasthenia Gravis-Potential Pathomechanisms and Treatment Directed against Specific Targets.Cells · 2024Review
- Non-coding RNA and its network in the pathogenesis of Myasthenia Gravis.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Review
- Immunosensors for Autoimmune-Disease-Related Biomarkers: A Literature Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Oculomotor fatigability with decrements of saccade and smooth pursuit for diagnosis of myasthenia gravis.Journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Low probability of myasthenia Gravis in patients presenting to neuro-ophthalmology clinic for evaluation of isolated ptosis.European journal of ophthalmology · 2023Review
- Myasthenia Gravis and Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome: New Developments in Diagnosis and Treatment.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myasthenia gravis (MG) and congenital myasthenic syndromes (CMS) are a group of disorders with a well characterised autoimmune or genetic and neurophysiological basis. We reviewed the literature from the last 20 years assessing the utility of various neurophysiological, immunological, provocative and genetic tests in MG and CMS. Diagnostic sensitivity of repetitive nerve stimulation test ranges between 14 and 94% and specificity between 73 and 100%; sensitivity of single-fibre EMG (SFEMG) test ranges between 64 and 100% and specificity between 22 and 100%; anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody sensitivity ranges from 13 to 97% and specificity ranges from 95 to 100%. Overall, SFEMG has the highest sensitivity while positive anti-AChR antibodies have the highest specificity. Newer testing strategies that have been investigated over the last couple of decades include ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials, otoacoustic emissions and disease-specific circulating miRNAs in serum for autoimmune myasthenia, as well as next-generation sequencing for genetic testing of CMS. While there has been significant progress in developing newer testing strategies for diagnosing MG and CMS over the last couple of decades, more research is needed to assess the utility of these newer tools regarding their sensitivity and specificity.
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.