Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40438573›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025

Mortality risk in patients with myasthenia gravis.

Mohamed Khateb, Shahar Shelly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

2 authors.

Mohamed KhatebDepartment of Neurology, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.
Shahar ShellyDepartment of Neurology, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Although some reports link Myasthenia Gravis to higher mortality, the evidence remains contradictory and unclear. Real-life data is limited primarily due to challenges in selecting control groups and mitigating bias. Additionally, a revised mortality assessment should be conducted due to recent advancements in Myasthenia Gravis treatments over the past decade, including new biological therapies and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 to 2023. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with Myasthenia Gravis at our tertiary center between 2000 and 2023, extracting mortality and clinical features compared to two age- and sex-matched control groups of neurological or rheumatologic patients. Results: We identified 436 Myasthenic patients and 2,616 controls (1308 in each control group). Myasthenia Gravis mortality was 14% at 5 years (61/422) and 21% at 10 years (87/422). Mortality was significantly higher than control groups ( Discussion: In conclusion, patients with Myasthenia Gravis had higher mortality rates. Thymic removal reduced mortality, while intubation is associated with increased mortality risk.

Indexed as

epidemiologymortalitymyasthenia gravismyasthenic crisissurvivalthymectomy

Identifiers

PMID40438573
PMCPMC12116355

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.