Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36237625›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2022

Inclusion body myositis: Update on the diagnostic and therapeutic landscape.

Elie Naddaf

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The N-of-1 Trials and where to use them in Rheumatology.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Current biomarkers in inclusion body myositis.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2024
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elie NaddafDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.
Mayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inclusion body myositis (IBM) is a progressive muscle disease affecting patients over the age of 40, with distinctive clinical and histopathological features. The typical clinical phenotype is characterized by prominent involvement of deep finger flexors and quadriceps muscles. Less common presentations include isolated dysphagia, asymptomatic hyper-CKemia, and axial or limb weakness beyond the typical pattern. IBM is associated with marked morbidity as majority of patients eventually become wheelchair dependent with limited use of their hands and marked dysphagia. Furthermore, IBM mildly affects longevity with aspiration pneumonia and respiratory complications being the most common cause of death. On muscle biopsy, IBM is characterized by a peculiar combination of endomysial inflammation, rimmed vacuoles, and protein aggregation. These histopathological features are reflective of the complexity of underlying disease mechanisms. No pharmacological treatment is yet available for IBM. Monitoring for swallowing and respiratory complications, exercise, and addressing mobility issues are the mainstay of management. Further research is needed to better understand disease pathogenesis and identify novel therapeutic targets.

Indexed as

agingidiopathic inflammatory myopathiesinclusion body myositisindividualized medicineneurodegenerative diseases

Identifiers

PMID36237625
PMCPMC9551222
OpenAlexW4297311869

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.