ArticleFrontiers in neurology2020
Assessment and Rating of Motor Cerebellar Ataxias With the Kinect v2 Depth Sensor: Extending Our Appraisal.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicenter Validation of Cerebellar Motor Learning Biomarker for Spinocerebellar Degenerations.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- iPatax: a Tablet-based Tool for Quantitative Assessment of Cerebellar Ataxia.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Upper Limb Ataxia Using a Virtual Reality-Based Evaluation System.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Temporal Relationship between Impairment of Cerebellar Motor Learning and Deterioration of Ataxia in Patients with Cerebellar Degeneration.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Article
- Quantification of Upper Limb Movements in Patients with Hereditary or Idiopathic Ataxia.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2023Article
- Impact of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to the Cerebellum on Performance of a Ballistic Targeting Movement.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2023Article
- Consensus Paper: Ataxic Gait.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2023Article
- Auto-Gait: Automatic Ataxia Risk Assessment with Computer Vision on Gait Task Videos.Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies · 2023Article
- Quantitative evaluation of upper limb ataxia in spinocerebellar ataxias.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022Article
- Rating scales and biomarkers for CAG-repeat spinocerebellar ataxias: Implications for therapy development.Journal of the neurological sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current assessment of patients with cerebellar disorders is based on conventional neurological examination that is dependent on subjective judgements. Quantitative measurement of cerebellar ataxias (CAs) is essential for assessment of evidence-based treatments and the monitoring of the progress or recovery of diseases. It may provide us a useful tool to navigate future treatments for ataxia. We developed a Kinect v2. sensor system with a novel algorithm to measure and evaluate movements for two tests of Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA): the nose-finger test and gait. For the nose-finger test, we evaluated and compared accuracy, regularities and smoothness in the movements of the index finger and the proximal limbs between cerebellar patients and control subjects. For the task of walking, we evaluated and compared stability between the two groups. The precision of the system for evaluation of movements was smaller than 2 mm. For the nose-finger test, the mildly affected patients tended to show more instability than the control subjects. For a severely affected patient, our system quantified the instability of movements of the index finger using kinematic parameters, such as fluctuations and average speed. The average speed appears to be the most sensitive parameter that contrasts between patients with CAs and control subjects. Furthermore, our system also detected the adventitious movements of more proximal body parts, such as the elbow, shoulder and head. Assessment of walking was possible only in patients with mild CAs. They demonstrated large sways and compensatory wide stances. These parameters appeared to show higher accuracy than SARA. This examiner-independent device measures movements of the points of interest of SARA more accurately than eye and further provides additional information about the ataxic movements (e.g., the adventitious movements of the elbow, shoulder and head in the nose-finger test and the wide-based walking with large oscillation in the gait task), which is out of the scope of SARA. Our new system enables more accurate scoring of SARA and further provides additional information that is not currently evaluated with SARA. Therefore, it provides an easier, more accurate and more systematic description of CAs.
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.