ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2024
Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Ataxia Correlates with Canonical Clinical Assessments in Chinese Spinocerebellar Ataxias.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Convergent validity, responsiveness, and meaningful within-subject change of the PROM-Ataxia in spinocerebellar ataxias.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Cerebellar clinical syndromes: the triad and rating scales.Journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Longitudinal Changes in Patient- and Clinical-Reported Outcomes in Early Spinocerebellar Ataxia Types 1, 2, 3, and 6 from the IDEA Study.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Article
- Psychomotor and non-motor correlates of cognition in spinocerebellar ataxias Types 1, 2, 3, and 6.Brain communications · 2025Article
- Early-Life Social Determinants of SCA6 Age at Onset, Severity, and Progression.Cerebellum (London, England) · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) patients' reports of their own experiences are essential to the outcome evaluation in clinical trials. To better understand the health condition and well-being of ataxia population, Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Ataxia (PROM-Ataxia) was developed. The aim of our study was to culturally adapt the PROM-Ataxia into Chinese version and assess its correlation with canonical clinical assessments. We translated the PROM-Ataxia into Chinese following the ISPOR TCA Task Force guidelines and evaluated its correlation with measures of motor ataxia, non-ataxia signs, quality of life, and mental health in 92 Chinese SCA participants. Nearly all the participants found this questionnaire complete and intelligible but some items were found repetitive or ambiguous. The total score of PROM-Ataxia from stage 0 to stage 3 was 23.24 ± 18.53, 79.11 ± 40.45, 144.30 ± 41.30, and 176.20 ± 31.74, respectively (p < 0.0001). It was strongly correlated with the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) (r = 0.832, p < 0.0001). Physical and activities domain of PROM-Ataxia were correlated with measures of motor ataxia, quality of life, and psychological health while mental health domain was correlated with all the clinical assessments including inventory of non-ataxia signs and cognitive assessment. We translated the PROM-Ataxia into Chinese for the first time, which allows transnational comparability in future studies. Our study validated the responsiveness of PROM-Ataxia to established clinical measures in Chinese SCA patients and implied its potential to evaluate the therapeutic effect and optimize the sensitivity of changes in clinical outcome assessments.
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.