ArticleNeurology and therapy2023
Evaluating Perceived Fatigue within an Adult Spinal Muscular Atrophy Population.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Longitudinal evaluation of fatigue in adult patients with spinal muscular atrophy and the impact of disease-modifying drugs.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2025Article
- A qualitative, mixed-method approach to reaching consensus on function, fatigue, and fatigability outcomes in teens and adults living with spinal muscular atrophy.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2025Article
- Diving into progress: a review on current therapeutic advancements in spinal muscular atrophy.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Long-term efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of apitegromab in patients with spinal muscular atrophy: results from the 36-month TOPAZ study.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Development of the SMA EFFORT: A new approach to characterize perceived physical fatigability in spinal muscular atrophy.Journal of neuromuscular diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSpinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is an autosomal recessive neuromuscular disease characterized by progressive muscle weakness and atrophy. While chronic fatigue is a common manifestation of SMA, the field lacks comprehensive data to assess the extent of its impact. Cure SMA, an SMA patient advocacy organization, conducted an online survey of its adults with SMA community members to measure the impact of fatigue.
methodsAll survey respondents were asked to complete questions on demographics, use of SMA treatment, and quality of life, but respondents were randomized to receive three of the following fatigue instruments: the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS), Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), PedsQL™ Multidimensional Fatigue (PedsQL MF) Scale, and Spinal Muscular Atrophy Health Index (SMA-HI) fatigue modules. Scales were evaluated for reliability and overall fatigue scores were evaluated by multivariate regression models to determine which variables were related to the final scores of each instrument.
resultsA total of 253 adults completed the online survey. When measured against the general population, statistically significant differences were found among adults with SMA for certain variables within each measurement instrument. However, there did not appear to be differences in fatigue levels among key subgroups within the SMA population.
conclusionsThis was the first use of more than two fatigue questionnaires simultaneously in SMA. The lack of a consistent relationship between SMA severity and fatigue levels was surprising. This may be related to the lack of specificity of the instruments for this population. An SMA-specific scale is needed to evaluate differences in fatigue impact across the SMA population.
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.