ReviewFrontiers in neurology2025
Clinical and cognitive assessment in Friedreich ataxia clinical trials: a review.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recent developments in Friedreich's ataxia: a state-of-the-art review.Brain communications · 2026Review
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
Friedreich ataxia (FRDA) is the most common type of inherited ataxia. It is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by progressive gait and limb ataxia, dysarthria, areflexia, and reduced proprioception and vibration sensation. Although a number of clinical trials have been conducted, there is currently no cure for this disease. In this article we review those clinical trials with a focus on the instruments used as endpoints to assess clinical progression, and discuss the potential benefits of integrating additional measures, including assessments from overlooked domains. We also review tools used to evaluate cognitive functions in individuals with FRDA, particularly those employing quantitative, objective, and time-based measures. We argue for the inclusion of cognitive and speech-related assessments in clinical trials, and examine the potential of developments in cognitive neuroscience and technology to address current measurement challenges and support more accurate and comprehensive evaluation of treatment effects. These innovations have the potential to complement existing approaches, enhance trial design, and advance clinical care.
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.