ArticleJournal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996)2026
Impulsivity in cerebellar ataxia: an online, multidimensional assessment.
Article in Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996), 2026. 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.
- Integrating remote testing and machine learning to identify markers of cerebellar ataxia at home.Communications medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While considered a motor control structure, the cerebellum contributes to non-motor functions, including impulsivity. However, whether it contributes to impulsivity in a domain-specific manner remains unknown. Studies on cerebellar ataxia (CA), a common model for cerebellar dysfunction, typically have small sample sizes, limiting robustness. In a multicenter cross-sectional study, we investigated the cerebellum's role in various forms of impulsivity by comparing large cohorts of CA to age- and education-matched neurotypical healthy (NH) controls. Additionally, to examine the ability to identify individuals with CA using impulsivity features alone, we developed supervised machine learning (ML) models. In experiment 1 (CA = 140, NH = 136), impulsivity was assessed using the BIS-11 questionnaire. In experiment 2 (CA = 110, NH = 107), performance-based impulsivity was assessed using the MCQ-27, evaluating delay discounting in monetary decision-making. Two ML models-Logistic Regression and Random Forest-were utilized to classify disorder status (CA/NH). The CA group showed higher BIS-11 scores (p = 0.001), indicating higher impulsivity, driven by motor (p < 0.001) and attention (p = 0.002) impulsivity. However, the CA group exhibited lower non-planning impulsivity (p = 0.014). In the MCQ-27, the CA group showed lower k-values (p < 0.005), indicating reduced impulsivity in monetary decisions. Both ML models demonstrated strong classification performance (AUC ≥ 0.85) in independent datasets. This study highlights the cerebellum's selective role in impulsivity. We found higher motor and attentional impulsivity in CA alongside lower non-planning and decision-making impulsivity. This suggests a unique impulsivity profile in CA that may indicate a compensatory mechanism for future events. ML models demonstrated high classification performance, suggesting impulsivity is a core non-motor feature of CA.
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.