ArticleJournal of neurology2015
Comparing speech characteristics in spinocerebellar ataxias type 3 and type 6 with Friedreich ataxia.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Cross-Language Study of Oral Diadochokinesis: Rates and Rhythm.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2026Article
- Adapting the Bogenhausen Dysarthria Scales (BoDyS) to Chilean Spanish Speakers: Face and Content Validation.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- The Contributions of Pitch, Loudness, and Rate Control to Speech Naturalness in Cerebellar Ataxia.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2024Article
- Quantitative Speech Assessment in Ataxia-Consensus Recommendations by the Ataxia Global Initiative Working Group on Digital-Motor Markers.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Review
- Sensitive Quantification of Cerebellar Speech Abnormalities Using Deep Learning Models.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutions · 2024Article
- Speech, Gait, and Vestibular Function in Cerebellar Ataxia with Neuropathy and Vestibular Areflexia Syndrome.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Differences in spontaneous speech fluency between Parkinson's disease and spinocerebellar ataxia type 3.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Ataxic speech disorders and Parkinson's disease diagnostics via stochastic embedding of empirical mode decomposition.PloS one · 2023Article
- The efficacy of acoustic-based articulatory phenotyping for characterizing and classifying four divergent neurodegenerative diseases using sequential motion rates.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2022Article
- Home-based biofeedback speech treatment improves dysarthria in repeat-expansion SCAs.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022Article
- Consensus Paper: Neurophysiological Assessments of Ataxias in Daily Practice.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2018Review
- Quantification of dysarthrοphonia in a Cypriot family with autosomal recessive hereditary spastic paraplegia associated with a homozygous SPG11 mutation.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2018Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patterns of dysarthria in spinocerebellar ataxias (SCAs) and their discriminative features still remain elusive. Here we aimed to compare dysarthria profiles of patients with (SCA3 and SCA6 vs. Friedreich ataxia (FRDA), focussing on three particularly vulnerable speech parameters (speaking rate, prosodic modulation, and intelligibility) in ataxic dysarthria as well as on a specific oral non-speech variable of ataxic impairment, i.e., the irregularity of oral motor diadochokinesis (DDK). 30 Patients with SCA3, SCA6, and FRDA, matched for group size (n = 10 each), disease severity, and disease duration produced various speech samples and DDK tasks. A discriminant analysis was used to differentiate speech and non-speech parameters between groups. Regularity of DDK was specifically impaired in SCA3, whereas impairments of speech parameters, i.e., rate and modulation were stronger affected in SCA6. Speech parameters are particularly vulnerable in SCA6, while non-speech oral motor features are notably impaired in SCA3.
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.