Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35876467›Full record

ArticleMultiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)2022

The MSIS-29 and SF-36 as outcomes in secondary progressive MS trials.

Eva Mm Strijbis, Pavle Repovic, Jop Mostert, James D Bowen, Bernard Mj Uitdehaag, Gary Cutter, Marcus W Koch

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06900959 (Transcranial Static Field Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT06900959 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Transcranial Static Field Stimulation (tSMS) and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for the Treatment of Neurological Symptoms

TypeinterventionalSponsorNeuromed IRCCSRan2025 to 2026Enrolled40ConditionsNeurological Diseases or ConditionsArmstranscranial static field stimulation (tSMS) and transcranial (tDCS)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The value of patient-reported outcome measures for multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2022
    Article
  8. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Eva Mm StrijbisDepartment of Neurology, MS Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pavle RepovicMultiple Sclerosis Center, Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jop MostertDepartment of Neurology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
James D BowenMultiple Sclerosis Center, Swedish Neuroscience Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4258-250X
Bernard Mj UitdehaagDepartment of Neurology, MS Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Gary CutterDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Marcus W KochDepartments of Clinical Neurosciences and Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9972-5092

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often used in clinical research, but little is known about their performance as longitudinal outcomes.

methodsWe used data from ASCEND, a large SPMS trial (

resultsPROM scores changed little over the 2 years of follow-up. In contrast to physical disability measures, there was no consistent trend in PROM change: significant worsening occurred about as often as improvement. Using a 6-month confirmation reduced the number of both worsening and improvement events without altering their relative balance. There was no clear difference in worsening events in groups based on population characteristics, nor was there a noticeable effect using different thresholds for clinically significant change.

conclusionWe found little consistent change in MSIS-29 and SF-36 over 2 years of follow-up in people with SPMS. Our findings show a disconnect between disability worsening and PROM change in this population. Our findings raise caution about the use of these PROMs as primary outcome measures in SPMS trials and call for a critical reappraisal of the longitudinal use of these measures in SPMS trials.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisHumanshealth related quality of life (HRQOL)MSIS-29patient-reported outcome measuresSecondary progressive MSSF-36

Identifiers

PMID35876467
PMCPMC9315187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.