ArticleNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2020
Developing an objective evaluating system to quantify the degree of upper limb movement impairment in patients with severe Friedreich's ataxia.
Article in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative Assessment of Upper Limb Ataxia Using a Virtual Reality-Based Evaluation System.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Using Smartphone Sensors for Ataxia Trials: Consensus Guidance by the Ataxia Global Initiative Working Group on Digital-Motor Biomarkers.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Review
- Objective Assessment of Upper-Extremity Motor Functions in Spinocerebellar Ataxia Using Wearable Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of standardized tools and objective measurements is essential to test the effectiveness of new drugs or rehabilitative protocols. Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA) patients with severe disease are often unable to perform the quantitative measurement tests currently used.
aimThe purpose of our study was to develop an easy-to-use application, for touchscreen devices, able to quantify the degree of upper limb movement impairment in patients with severe Friedreich's ataxia. The APP, which we named "Twelve-Red-Squares App-Coo-Test" (12-RSACT), assesses the upper limb ataxia by measuring the test execution time.
methodsAll patients were clinically evaluated using the Composite Cerebellar Functional Severity (CCFS) and the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA). We recruited 92 healthy subjects and 36 FRDA patients with a SARA mean value of 28.8.1 ± 8.2. All participants in our study underwent upper limb movement assessment using the new 12-RSACT, the Click Test, and a well-established system, i.e., the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT).
resultsWe observed a strong linear correlation between the measurements obtained with the 12-RSACT and those obtained with 9HPT, Click Test, CCFS, and SARA. The 12-RSACT was characterized by excellent internal consistency and intra-rater and test-retest reliability. The minimal detectable change (MDC%) was excellent too. Additionally, the 12-RSACT turned out to be faster and easier to perform compared with the 9HPT.
conclusionThe 12-RSACT is an inexpensive test and is easy to use, which can be administered quickly. Therefore, 12-RSACT is a promising tool to assess the upper limb ataxia in FRDA patients and even those with severe diseases.
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.