ReviewCerebellum (London, England)2022
Instrumented Objective Clinical Examination of Cerebellar Ataxia: the Upper and Lower Limb-a Review.
Review in Cerebellum (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- iPatax: a Tablet-based Tool for Quantitative Assessment of Cerebellar Ataxia.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Exploring the Potential of Scales to Assess Different Types of Ataxia: Meta-review.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Review
- Validation of the Italian Version of the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) in Multiple Sclerosis: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Article
- Home-Based Rehabilitation With Frenkel's Exercises for Adrenomyeloneuropathy: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Multimodal Digital Phenotyping of Behavior in a Neurology Clinic: Development of the Neurobooth Platform and the First Two Years of Data Collection.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Using Smartphone Sensors for Ataxia Trials: Consensus Guidance by the Ataxia Global Initiative Working Group on Digital-Motor Biomarkers.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Review
- Gait Analysis in Neurorehabilitation: From Research to Clinical Practice.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A Dynamic Nomogram to Predict the Risk of Stroke in Emergency Department Patients With Acute Dizziness.Frontiers in neurology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cerebellar dysfunction results in impairments in co-ordination or 'ataxia'. Bedside examination of cerebellar function has changed little since the early nineteenth century with the exception being the oculomotor examination which has become instrumented. Otherwise, competence and confidence in performing the clinical assessment relies heavily on the skill and experience of the clinician. Potentially, instrumented objective measurement will more accurately assess the severity of ataxia and the changes brought about by advancing therapies in pharmaceutical trials and in rehabilitation intervention. This study describes instrumented versions of several bedside tests of cerebellar function, including rhythmic tapping of the hand (RTH), finger-nose test (FNT), dysdiadochokinesia (DDK), ramp tracking (RMT), ballistic tracking (BT), rhythmic tapping of the foot (RTF) and the heel shin (HST) examination which were validated against scores from Ataxia Rating Scales (ARS) such as the Scale of Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA). While all of the instrumented tests accurately distinguished between ataxic subjects and controls, there was a difference in performance, with the best four performing upper limb tests being RTH, FNT, DDK and BT. A combination of BT plus RTH provided the best correlation with the SARA and outperformed a combination of all the bedside tests (Spearman 0.8; p < 0.001 compared to 0.68; p < 0.001 for the combined set) in identifying the presence and severity of ataxia. This indicates that there is redundancy in the information provided by the bedside tests and that adding other tests to BT plus RTH does not add accuracy to the assessment of ataxia. This analysis highlighted the need for metrics that could be generalised to each of the assessments of ataxia, so, in turn, domains of stability, timing, accuracy and rhythmicity (STAR domains) were developed and compared to the SARA. The STAR criteria could potentially influence the future of instrumented assessment in CA and pave the way for further research into the objective measurement of the cerebellar examination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33852136What 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.