ArticleMovement disorders clinical practice2022
Continuous Monitoring of Essential Tremor: Standards and Challenges.
Article in Movement disorders clinical practice, 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.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Transcutaneous Afferent Patterned Stimulation Therapy for Essential Tremor: A Randomized Pragmatic Clinical Trial.Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Trial
- Structural brain changes in the development of essential tremor: toward early diagnosis.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Essential Tremor and Digital Biomarkers: A Scoping Review Using the TRACE Framework to Map Readiness for Clinical Trials and Routine Practice.Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- A generalizable and open-source algorithm for real-life monitoring of tremor in Parkinson's disease.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
- A deep learning approach to remotely assessing essential tremor with handwritten images.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Editorial: Digital biomarkers in movement disorders.Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The value of continuous symptom monitoring in people with essential tremor is uncertain. Objectives: To determine the relationship between tremor amplitude measured with wearable inertial sensors and clinician- and patient-rated measures. Methods: For 14 days, patients (1) wore inertial sensors on both wrists, (2) self-rated their tremor using a diary, (3) drew spirals, and (4) completed an activities of daily living scale once daily. Patients were also scored using The Essential Tremor Rating Scale (TETRAS) performance in the clinic by a clinician. Results: We found strong correlations in patient-reported metrics of tremor, but weak correlations between these data and both the inertial sensor data and the in-clinic TETRAS scores. Conclusions: The patient experience of tremor during normal daily activities may differ from the transducer-based measures of tremor amplitude and rating scales of tremor severity. Future studies should consider how to record features of tremor that are important to patients.
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.