ArticleAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2022
Quantitative evaluation of upper limb ataxia in spinocerebellar ataxias.
Article in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicenter Validation of Cerebellar Motor Learning Biomarker for Spinocerebellar Degenerations.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Aided Kinematic Profiling of Reaching Movements Separates Spinocerebellar Ataxia type 12 and Essential Tremor.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Quantitative Assessment of Upper Limb Ataxia Using a Virtual Reality-Based Evaluation System.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- At-home wearables and machine learning capture motor impairment and progression in adult ataxias.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Characterization of Upper Limb Motor Dysfunctions in Spinocerebellar Ataxia 38: Kinematic Analysis of the "Hand-to-Mouth" Task.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Article
- Temporal Relationship between Impairment of Cerebellar Motor Learning and Deterioration of Ataxia in Patients with Cerebellar Degeneration.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo quantitatively evaluate upper limb ataxia using a novel pen-like sensor device in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) and to assess its validity, reliability, and sensitivity to disease progression.
methodsWe designed a cross-sectional and longitudinal study of patients with SCA and healthy controls. Upper limb ataxia was evaluated using a device that measures the three-dimensional position every 10 msec. Participants were instructed to move a pen-like part of the device iteratively between two buttons. We evaluated the time, length, velocity, and variation coefficient of the stroke, and calculated the distortion index using the mean squared error. The following scales were also evaluated: Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA), the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS), and the nine-hole pegboard test. Subjects were followed 12 months after the baseline evaluation.
resultsA total of 42 patients with SCA and 33 healthy controls were enrolled and evaluated. For all ataxia indices measured using the device there were significant differences between healthy controls and patients with SCA. Among the ataxia indices, the distortion index showed the strongest correlation with the SARA and ICARS upper limb score (Pearson's r = 0.647 and 0.722, respectively). Test-retest reliability was high for most of the ataxia indices. In the longitudinal analysis, the distortion index showed high standardized response mean and adjusted effect size, regardless of disease severity.
interpretationOur study demonstrated that the distortion index is a reliable functional marker that is sensitive to longitudinal change in patients with SCA.
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.