ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Fragile X-associated tremor ataxia syndrome rating scale: Revision and content validity using a mixed method approach.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Essential tremor-like phenotype in Fragile X carrier women.Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Analysis of Neuroradiological Biomarkers for Fragile X-Associated Tremor/Ataxia Syndrome and Implications for Clinical Trials.Annals of neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The original Fragile X-associated Tremor Ataxia Syndrome Rating Scale (FXTAS-RS) contained 61 items, some requiring modifications to better meet recommendations for patient-focused rating scale development. Purpose: Provide initial validation of a revised version of the FXTAS-RS for motor signs. Method: We conducted a two-phase mixed-method approach. In Phase 1, revision, we implemented a Delphi technique identifying pertinent domains/subdomains and developing items through expert consensus. In Phase 2, content validation, we conducted cognitive pretesting assessing comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, and relevance of items to FXTAS motor signs. Results: After five rounds of Delphi panel and two rounds of cognitive pretesting, the revised version of the FXTAS-RS was established with 18 items covering five domains and 13 subdomains of motor signs. Cognitive pretesting revealed adequate content validity for the assessment of FXTAS motor signs. Conclusion: The revised FXTAS-RS has been successfully validated for content and it is now ready for large-scale field validation.
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.