Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40317321›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurology2025

Analyzing recurrent events in multiple sclerosis: a review of statistical models with application to the MSOAC database.

David Herman, Julien Tanniou, Emmanuelle Leray, Chloe Pierret, Quentin Pilard

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

David HermanEcole des hautes études en santé publique (EHESP), 35043, Rennes, France. david.herman@edu.ehesp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-8802-4914
Julien TanniouQuinten Health, Quinten, 75017, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3806-2413
Emmanuelle LerayUniversité de Rennes, EHESP, CNRS, Inserm, ARENES UMR 6051, RSMS U 1309, 35043, Rennes, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8424-4499
Chloe PierretUniversité de Rennes, EHESP, CNRS, Inserm, ARENES UMR 6051, RSMS U 1309, 35043, Rennes, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-2702-3343
Quentin PilardQuinten Health, Quinten, 75017, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are susceptible to experience recurrent events of disability progression and relapses. Many studies still focus on analyzing MS events with traditional methods such as Cox proportional hazards, Poisson, and logistic regression that either ignore subsequent events or fail to account for overdispersion and dependency between events. The aim of this study was to conduct a literature review to identify the main recurrent event models, with subsequent application of these models to the Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium (MSOAC) placebo database. A total of nine main recurrent event models were identified, compared and applied to the MSOAC database to evaluate the effect of the disease course on the number of changes in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and relapse rate. Recurrent events methods have provided more precise estimates than traditional methods. Despite the similarities in common and event-specific estimates for clinical MS outcomes, the interpretations of the parameter estimates resulting from the models are different. Medical researchers should prioritize recurrent event methods in their statistical plans to avoid information loss and improve the precision of estimated effects.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualModels, StatisticalMultiple SclerosisDisease ProgressionHumansRecurrenceCount dataCox proportional hazards modelMultiple sclerosisRecurrent eventsSurvival analyses

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.