ArticleCureus2024
Characterizing Myasthenia Gravis Symptoms, Exacerbations, and Crises From Neurologist's Clinical Notes Using Natural Language Processing.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital assessment in myasthenia gravis: evidence, validation, and a proposed framework for autoimmune heterogeneity, remote monitoring, and clinical endpoints.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Female gender and quality of life outcomes in myasthenia gravis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare, autoantibody neuromuscular disorder characterized by fatigable weakness. Real-world evidence based on administrative and structured datasets regarding MG may miss important details related to the clinical encounter. Examination of free-text clinical progress notes has the potential to illuminate aspects of MG care. Objective The primary objective was to examine and characterize neurologist progress notes in the care of individuals with MG regarding the prevalence of documentation of clinical subtypes, antibody status, symptomatology, and MG deteriorations, including exacerbations and crises. The secondary objectives were to categorize MG deteriorations into practical, objective states as well as examine potential sources of clinical inertia in MG care. Methods We performed a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of de-identified neurologist clinical notes from 2017 to 2022. A qualitative analysis of physician descriptions of MG deteriorations and a discussion of risks in MG care (risk for adverse effects, risk for clinical decompensation, etc.) was performed. Results Of the 3,085 individuals with MG, clinical subtypes and antibody status identified included gMG (n = 400; 13.0%), ocular MG (n = 253; 8.2%), MG unspecified (2,432; 78.8%), seropositivity for acetylcholine receptor antibody (n = 441; 14.3%), and MuSK antibody (n = 29; 0.9%). The most common gMG manifestations were dysphagia (n = 712; 23.0%), dyspnea (n = 626; 20.3%), and dysarthria (n = 514; 16.7%). In MG crisis patients, documentation of difficulties with MG standard therapies was common (n = 62; 45.2%). The qualitative analysis of MG deterioration types includes symptom fluctuation, symptom worsening with treatment intensification, MG deterioration with rescue therapy, and MG crisis. Qualitative analysis of MG-related risks included the toxicity of new therapies and concern for worsening MG because of changing therapies. Conclusions This study of neurologist progress notes demonstrates the potential for real-world evidence generation in the care of individuals with MG. MG patients suffer fluctuating symptomatology and a spectrum of clinical deteriorations. Adverse effects of MG therapies are common, highlighting the need for effective, less toxic treatments.
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.