Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35305246›Full record

ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2023

Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation to Brazilian Portuguese of the Cerebellar Cognitive Affective/Schmahmann Syndrome Scale.

Stephanie Suzanne de Oliveira Scott, José Luiz Pedroso, Victor Vitalino Elias, Paulo Ribeiro Nóbrega, Emmanuelle Silva Tavares Sobreira, Marcela Patrícia de Almeida, Maria Thereza Drumond Gama, Breno Kazuo Massuyama, Orlando Graziani Povoas Barsottini, Norberto Anizio Ferreira Frota and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Cognitive-Affective Functions of the Cerebellum.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie Suzanne de Oliveira ScottNeurology Section, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil.
José Luiz PedrosoAtaxia Unit, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Victor Vitalino EliasNeurology Service, Hospital Geral de Fortaleza, Fortaleza, Brazil.
Paulo Ribeiro NóbregaNeurology Section, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil.
Emmanuelle Silva Tavares SobreiraNeurology Section, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil.
Marcela Patrícia de AlmeidaAtaxia Unit, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maria Thereza Drumond GamaAtaxia Unit, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Breno Kazuo MassuyamaAtaxia Unit, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Orlando Graziani Povoas BarsottiniAtaxia Unit, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Norberto Anizio Ferreira FrotaNeurology Service, Hospital Geral de Fortaleza, Fortaleza, Brazil.
Pedro Braga-NetoNeurology Section, Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil. pbraganeto@ufc.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9186-9243
Universidade Federal de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Federal do Ceará · BRHospital Geral de Fortaleza · BRUniversidade de Fortaleza · BRUniversidade Estadual do Ceará · BR

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico Productivity Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome (CCAS) is characterized by deficits in executive functions, language processing, spatial orientation, and affect regulation in patients with cerebellar disease. The symptoms can occur isolated or along with motor and coordination symptoms. The aim of our study was to translate and culturally adapt the CCAS scale to Brazilian Portuguese and validate the scale in our population. We performed a cross-sectional study with patients with primary and secondary ataxia. The study included 111 individuals, aged between 20 and 80 years, of both genders, 20 without cognitive and/or affective complaints who participated in the pre-test phase, 40 with cerebellar disease (hereditary/neurodegenerative ataxia or acquired/secondary cerebellar ataxia), and 51 healthy controls with no evidence of cognitive impairment and no affective symptoms matched for sex, age, and educational level. The scale was translated, culturally adapted, and validated. Statistical analysis of the data was performed, with association tests, mean comparison, and ROC curve analysis. Based on the analysis of the ROC curve, optimal cutoff values ​were found for each subitem of the scale. The translated and adapted scale has good internal consistency, is reproducible, has good reliability, and has the potential to be a reliable tool for screening cognitive symptoms in patients with cerebellar disease.

Indexed as

Cerebellar AtaxiaCerebellar DiseasesSpinocerebellar DegenerationsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAtaxiaBrazilCognitionCross-Cultural ComparisonCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLanguageMaleMiddle AgedAffectAtaxiaCerebellumCognition

Identifiers

PMID35305246
OpenAlexW4221030021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.