ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2025
The Cerebellar Neuropsychiatric Rating Scale in the Spinocerebellar Ataxias.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Remote Online-Based Application of the Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome Scale.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- An International Survey of Patients with Ataxia: Trends in Patient-Reported Symptoms.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Cerebellar clinical syndromes: the triad and rating scales.Journal of neurology · 2026Review
- The Cerebellar Neuropsychiatric Rating Scale Version 2: Development and Validation.Cerebellum (London, England) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is currently no established screening instrument that detects neuropsychiatric features in individuals with cerebellar ataxia. We hypothesized that the Cerebellar Neuropsychiatric Rating Scale (CNRS) would capture the neuropsychiatry of patients enrolled in the natural history study of the Clinical Research Consortium for the Study of Cerebellar Ataxia, and provide novel insights not revealed by other measures. We studied CNRS data in 362 patients with spinocerebellar ataxia types 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 27B, and cerebellar ataxia, neuropathy, vestibular areflexia syndrome (CANVAS). We grouped patients by mild, moderate, and severe disease severity according to Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) functional stage. We analyzed scores on the CNRS and its five constituent domains for the entire cohort and by severity subgroup. We fit a mixed effects model to examine the effect of severity. We analyzed correlations with other clinical measures: Cerebellar Cognitive Affective / Schmahmann Syndrome Scale (CCAS-S), Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Ataxia (PROM-Ataxia), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Euro-Qol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D), and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). The CNRS detected neuropsychiatric symptoms, with highest scores on Attentional and Emotional Control domains. The mixed effects model revealed that ataxia severity influences scores, with mean scores increasing with ataxia severity. The CNRS correlated with the PROM-Ataxia Mental domain, particularly between Emotional Control and section 1 (psychiatric) items. Emotional Control also correlated with PHQ-9 and EQ-5D. Correlations with the CCAS-S Affect and FSS were weak. The CNRS provides novel neuropsychiatric insights into spinocerebellar ataxia that are missed by other measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40320465What 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.