ArticleScientific reports2020
Objective Assessment of Cerebellar Ataxia: A Comprehensive and Refined Approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Two Therapeutic Approaches of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in a Sardinian Family Affected by Spinocerebellar Ataxia 38: a Clinical and Computerized 3D Gait Analysis Study.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Trial
- iPatax: a Tablet-based Tool for Quantitative Assessment of Cerebellar Ataxia.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Contrastive Learning Model for Wearable-Based Ataxia Assessment.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2026Article
- Collection of the digital data from the neurological examination.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Lurcher Mouse as a Model of Cerebellar Syndromes.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Review
- At-home wearable-based monitoring predicts clinical measures and biological biomarkers of disease severity in Friedreich's Ataxia.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- Multifeature quantitative motor assessment of upper limb ataxia including drawing and reaching.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2024Article
- Upper limb intention tremor assessment: opportunities and challenges in wearable technology.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Review
- Oxidative stress and ion channels in neurodegenerative diseases.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Review
- Objective Assessment of Upper-Extremity Motor Functions in Spinocerebellar Ataxia Using Wearable Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of upper extremity ataxia through image processing in individuals with multiple sclerosis.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2022Article
- Evolution of disability in spinocerebellar ataxias type 1, 2, 3, and 6.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022Article
- Instrumented Objective Clinical Examination of Cerebellar Ataxia: the Upper and Lower Limb-a Review.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2022Review
- Assessment of movement disorders using wearable sensors during upper limb tasks: A scoping review.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2022Article
- Decomposition of Reaching Movements Enables Detection and Measurement of Ataxia.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parametric analysis of Cerebellar Ataxia (CA) could be of immense value compared to its subjective clinical assessments. This study focuses on a comprehensive scheme for objective assessment of CA through the instrumented versions of 9 commonly used neurological tests in 5 domains- speech, upper limb, lower limb, gait and balance. Twenty-three individuals diagnosed with CA to varying degrees and eleven age-matched healthy controls were recruited. Wearable inertial sensors and Kinect camera were utilised for data acquisition. Binary and multilabel discrimination power and intra-domain relationships of the features extracted from the sensor measures and the clinical scores were compared using Graph Theory, Centrality Measures, Random Forest binary and multilabel classification approaches. An optimal subset of 13 most important Principal Component (PC) features were selected for CA-control classification. This classification model resulted in an impressive performance accuracy of 97% (F1 score = 95.2%) with Holmesian dimensions distributed as 47.7% Stability, 6.3% Timing, 38.75% Accuracy and 7.24% Rhythmicity. Another optimal subset of 11 PC features demonstrated an F1 score of 84.2% in mapping the total 27 PC across 5 domains during CA multilabel discrimination. In both cases, the balance (Romberg) test contributed the most (31.1% and 42% respectively), followed by the peripheral tests whereas gait (Walking) test contributed the least. These findings paved the way for a better understanding of the feasibility of an instrumented system to assist informed clinical decision-making.
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.