ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Objective assessment of dysarthric disorders in patients with multiple sclerosis depending on sex, age, and type of text read.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. 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.
- Measuring Quality of Life in the Speakers with Dysarthria: Reliability and Validity of the Persian Version of the Qol-Dys.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Article
- Morphosyntactic Abilities and Cognitive Performance in Multiple Sclerosis.Brain sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess dysarthric disorders in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients in comparison with healthy individuals and MS patients without dysarthria depending on the patient's sex, age, and the type of text read using an objective tool. Methods: The study was carried out in a group of 72 persons, including 24 with MS presenting dysarthria (study group) and 24 healthy individuals (healthy control group), and 24 with MS without dysarthria (MS control group). Performance (reading) time was evaluated by means of an objective tool created for the purpose of the analysis. Results: The study showed significant statistical differences in the analyzed performance time of: poetry reading, prose reading, and completing a diction exercise, among persons with MS from the study group presenting dysarthria and both control groups ( Conclusion: The objective tool created for the purpose of speech analysis is useful in detecting discrepancies in performance (reading) time among MS patients with dysarthria, and healthy individuals, as well as patients with MS without dysarthria and can be used in clinical practice for diagnostic purposes, however, further research is essential to complete its 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.