ArticlePloS one2025
Predicting achievement of clinical goals using machine learning in myasthenia gravis.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comprehensive Care Goals in Myasthenia Gravis: Expert Consensus Recommendations Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyasthenia Gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disease characterized by the production of autoantibodies against neuromuscular junctions, leading to varying degrees of severity and outcomes among patients. This variability makes clinical evaluation crucial for determining appropriate treatment targets. However, accurately assessing Minimal Manifestation (MM) status is challenging, requiring expertise in MG management. Therefore, this study aims to develop a diagnostic model for MM in MG patients by leveraging their clinical scores and machine learning approaches.
methodsThis study included 1,603 MG patients enrolled from the Japan MG Registry in the 2021 survey. We employed non-negative matrix factorization to decompose three MG clinical scores (MG composite score, MGADL scale, and MG quality of life (QOL) 15r) into four distinct modules: Diplopia, Ptosis, Systemic symptoms, and QOL. We developed a machine learning model with the four modules to predict MM or better status in MG patients. Using 414 registrants from the Japan MG Registry in the 2015 survey, we validated the model's performance using various metrics, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, F1 score, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC).
resultsThe ensemble model achieved an AUROC of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.94-0.94), accuracy of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.86-0.88), sensitivity of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.85-0.86), specificity of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.88-0.91), precision of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.92-0.94), F1 score of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.88-0.89), and MCC of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.72-0.75) on the validation dataset.
conclusionsThe developed MM diagnostic model can effectively predict MM or better status in MG patients, potentially guiding clinicians in determining treatment objectives and evaluating treatment outcomes.
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.