ArticleNeurology2023
Addressing Outcome Measure Variability in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Trials.
Article in Neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring the effect of rozanolixizumab using the Myasthenia Gravis Impairment Index: analyses from the randomized phase 3 MycarinG study.Journal of neurology · 2025Trial
- Minimal Symptom Expression in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Valuable Patient-Centric Treatment Goal.European journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Digital assessment in myasthenia gravis: evidence, validation, and a proposed framework for autoimmune heterogeneity, remote monitoring, and clinical endpoints.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Comparison of the Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis and Myasthenia Gravis Activity of Daily Living Scores From a Clinical Practice Perspective.Muscle & nerve · 2025Article
- Eculizumab as Treatment in Refractory Impeding and Myasthenic Crisis: A Case Series.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Longitudinal Improvement in Respiratory Function Following Plasma Exchange in Patients with Severe Myasthenia Gravis.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- A Quantitative Study of Factors Influencing Myasthenia Gravis Telehealth Examination Score.Muscle & nerve · 2025Article
- Eculizumab in refractory myasthenia gravis: a real-world single-center experience.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Efgartigimod Followed by Telitacicept in Adult Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Retrospective Case Series.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- AI-Powered Telemedicine for Automatic Scoring of Neuromuscular Examinations.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Expert consensus recommendations for improving and standardising the assessment of patients with generalised myasthenia gravis.European journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Myasthenia gravis: the changing treatment landscape in the era of molecular therapies.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2024Review
- Application of digital tools and artificial intelligence in the Myasthenia Gravis Core Examination.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Experience of Daily Life with Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Qualitative Investigation and Assessment of Instrument Content Validity.Neurology and therapy · 2023Article
- Article
- Validation and clinical utility of OMGRate and MG-QOL15 in evaluating symptoms and quality of life in Chinese patients with ocular myasthenia gravis.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An increasing number of clinical trials are enrolling patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). A lack of standardization in the performance of outcome measures leads to confusion among site research teams and is a source of variability in clinical trial data. MGNet, the NIH-supported Rare Disease Clinical Research Network for MG, views standardization of MG outcome measures as a critical need. To address this issue, a group of experts summarized key outcome measures used in MG clinical trials and a symposium was convened to address issues contributing to outcome measure variability. Consensus recommendations resulted in changes to outcome measure instructions and, in some cases, modifications to specific instruments. Recommended changes were posted for public commentary before finalization. Changes to the MG-Activities of Daily Living, MG-Quality of Life-15r, and MG-Impairment Index were limited to adding details to the administration instructions. Recommendations for proper positioning of participants and how to score items that could not be performed because of non-MG reasons were provided for the MG Composite. The Quantitative MG (QMG) score required the most attention, and changes were made both to the instructions and the performance of certain items resulting in the QMG-Revised. The Postintervention Status was believed to have a limited role in clinical trials, except for the concept of minimal manifestation status. As a next step, training materials and revised source documents, which will be freely available to study teams, will be created and posted on the MGNet website. Further studies are needed to validate changes made to the QMG-Revised.
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.