Observational studyJournal of neurology2022
Generalization of ocular myasthenia gravis 10 years after onset.
Observational study 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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Comprehensive Care Goals in Myasthenia Gravis: Expert Consensus Recommendations Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2026Review
- Association Between Immunotherapy and Generalization in Ocular Myasthenia Gravis as a Function of Antibody Status.Revista de neurologia · 2026Article
- Identification of Ocular and Systemic Predictors and Development of a Prediction Model in Ocular Myasthenia Gravis.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Comparative study of ocular and generalized myasthenia gravis in a South Korean cohort.PloS one · 2026Article
- Mental Health Experiences and Challenges Among Individuals with Myasthenia Gravis: Insights from Patient-Centered, Qualitative Analyses.Advances in therapy · 2025Review
- Factors associated with increased severity of generalized myasthenia gravis among patients in the United States and Europe.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Features and Outcomes of Ocular Myasthenia Gravis in a Tertiary Philippine Hospital.Acta medica Philippina · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeneralization of ocular myasthenia gravis (OMG) represents a pejorative evolution, and no validated generalization-prevention strategy exists. The study aimed to determine the percentage of patients with OMG generalization and identify factors predictive of it to establish a prediction score.
methodsThis retrospective, observational study included 151 patients diagnosed with OMG after an initial work-up in our institution. The outcome measure was time to MG generalization. The explanatory variables were age at onset (> 55 years), sex, first-year anti-acetylcholine-receptor antibody-positivity, repetitive nerve stimulation showing electromyogram decrement and corticosteroid use. Kaplan-Meier estimations of the probability of risk of generalization, and descriptive and multivariate Cox model analyses were computed. A nomogram combining explanatory variables was used to establish a score to predict the probability of OMG generalization.
resultsAmong 183 patients' charts identified, 151 had confirmed OMG. Their median follow-up was 5.7 years. Estimations (95% CI) of OMG-generalization risk at 1, 3 and 10 years post-symptom onset, respectively, were: 13.0% (7.3-18.2), 25.1% (17.5-32.0) and 37.8% (27.2-45.2). The p-value-based multivariate analysis associated generalization with female sex, electromyogram decrement and first-year anti-acetylcholine-receptor antibody positivity, and Akaike information criterion-based analysis retained those three parameters and corticosteroid use. A nomogram was built and validated with an optimism-corrected C-statistic of 0.68, and calibration plots showed good fit.
conclusionsOur population's percentage of OMG generalization is in line with recent publications. Using the identified prognostic factors, the nomogram provided a score to predict the probable risk of generalization in our cohort.
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.