Observational studyBMC public health2025
Assessment of functioning using the WHODAS 2.0 among people with myasthenia gravis-associated disability: a nationwide follow-up study.
Observational study in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvancements in treatment have increased the life expectancy of patients with Myasthenia Gravis (MG), yet the understanding of functional changes in these individuals remains limited. In our study, we explored the functional abilities of individuals with MG using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0).
methodsThis observational study analyzed data from 286 patients with MG, acquired from the Data Bank of Persons with Disabilities (TDPD) in Taiwan between July 11, 2012, and December 31, 2021. Participants were diagnosed with MG after the acute phase. The functional disability outcome was assessed using the WHODAS 2.0. Due to non-normal distribution of variables, we used the Wilcoxon rank sum and chi-square tests for group comparisons by age. Longitudinal associations between functional changes and demographic characteristics were assessed using generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusting for age, sex, educational level, and respiratory dysfunction.
resultsThe average follow-up period was three years. At the initial evaluation, younger individuals (< 65 years) generally demonstrated less severe disability across most functional domains, with the exception of social participation. Patients with a single disability in a specific function performed better than those with multiple disabilities. The provision of technical aids or other environmental interventions resulted in significant functional improvements across all domains. During follow-up, significant functional improvements were observed, especially among patients residing in institutions, those without respiratory disabilities, and those with reduced mobility at the time of initial assessment. The GEE analysis indicated that younger patients with MG experienced functional changes comparable to older patients. Notably, respiratory disability was identified as a key factor contributing to cognitive decline. Additionally, only 10.5% of patients aged 18-64 were employed at the time of the study.
conclusionsOur findings highlight the complexity of disabilities associated with MG, with social participation emerging as a particularly vulnerable domain. Although younger patients initially exhibited better functional performance, their long-term functional changes were comparable to those observed in older patients. Given the impact of functional limitations on employment, future research may focus on return-to-work interventions, as labor market participation plays a crucial role in fostering social engagement for individuals with MG.
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.