ArticleMovement disorders clinical practice
Ranking of Dystonia Severity by Pairwise Video Comparison.
Article in Movement disorders clinical practice. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReviewers of dystonia rating scales agree on the need to assess symptoms more comprehensively. During the development of a quantitative dystonia assessment by video-perceptive computing, we devised a video-based severity ranking as a procedure to create a validation standard without the use of clinical scales.
methodsThirty-four patients with dystonia (17 with dystonic tremor) and 2 controls were assessed with clinical scales and video-recordings of 24 short movement tasks. Two to 4 raters compared multiple permutations of videos from 22 subjects, including 2 healthy controls, until a complete rank order was achieved. Inter-rater agreement was expressed as normalized Kendall tau distance. Spearman correlations of video rank order with clinical scales and self-rating were repeated for tremor/nontremor subgroups.
resultsNormalized Kendall tau distances were <0.3 for 15 items. The video rank order for sitting and head movements correlated with clinical scales for the whole group (rho 0.52-0.87) and in the subgroup without tremor. In the tremor subgroup such correlation was perceived in the 2 items involving sitting. Video rank order correlated with quality of life self-rating only in 1 item (arms held in front, palm down).
conclusionsThe agreement of video rankings between raters is remarkable. The lack of correlation in the tremor subgroup in several items may be interpreted as tremor being considered in video comparisons but not in clinical scales. This supports video-based ranking as a more comprehensive rating of dystonia and as a possible validation instrument applicable in situations in which no reference standard is available.
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.