ArticleMovement disorders clinical practice2023
Assessing the Severity of Cervical Dystonia: Ask the Doctor or Ask the Patient?
Article in Movement disorders clinical practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled, Crossover Trial of incobotulinumtoxinA Treatment for Upper Limb Tremor.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Trial
- Patient Perceptions of a Preventive Effect of Long-Term Botulinum Neurotoxin Therapy in Cervical Dystonia.Toxins · 2026Article
- External Factors Modulating Pain and Pain-Related Functional Impairment in Cervical Dystonia.Movement disorders clinical practice · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Assessing disease severity can be performed using either clinician-rated scales (CRS) or patient-rated outcome (PRO) tools. These two measures frequently demonstrate poor correlations. Objectives: To determine if the correlation between a CRS and PRO for motor features of cervical dystonia (CD) improves by accounting for non-motor features. Methods: Subjects with CD (N = 209) were evaluated using a CRS (Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale, TWSTRS) and a PRO (Cervical Dystonia Impact Profile, CDIP-58). Results: Linear regression revealed a weak correlation between the two measures, even when considering only the motor subscales of each. The strength of this relationship improved with a regression model that included non-motor symptoms of pain, depression, and disability. Conclusions: These results argue that the results of motor assessments in a PRO for CD cannot be fully appreciated without simultaneous assessment of non-motor co-morbidities. This conclusion might apply to other disorders, especially those with frequent non-motor co-morbidities.
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.