ArticleJournal of neurology2025
Challenging or less challenging oral diadochokinetic tasks-what works best in Huntington disease? A cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn Huntington disease (HD), speech alterations are common and may emerge before onset of chorea. Slow and irregular motion rates, i.e. altered oral diadochokinesis (oDDK), are a distinctive feature. This study investigated oDDK using alternating (AMR) and sequential motion rate (SMR) tasks in manifest HD and explored the impact of antidopaminergic medications (ADM).
methodsSpeech samples were acquired from 30 healthy controls (14 men; 27-78 years¸ age- and gender-matched to HD subjects) and 35 individuals with early-to-moderate HD (18 men; 22-76 years) phenotyped using standardized scales (UHDRS'99) and MR imaging to estimate disease severity. Acoustic analysis was used to quantify rate and regularity of oDDK. In an exploratory subgroup analysis, the impact of ADMs on oDKK was explored by comparing patients with and without ADMs (HD-ADM: n = 16; 8 men; 22-76 years; HD-nADM; n = 19; 10 men; 28-61 years).
resultsHD patients were slower and more irregular in AMR and SMR tasks (p < 0.001) compared to controls. Analyses using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) showed the best characteristics for AMR (AUC = 95.0%). oDDK parameters correlated with measures of motor, cognitive and functional impairment and striatal atrophy. Patients on ADMs showed slower motion rates in both tasks (AMR p = 0.021; SMR p = 0.026), but unchanged regularity.
conclusionsDecreased AMR performance alone captured early motor impairment accurately, reflects disease severity and is ADM-sensitive. Therefore, objective acoustic analysis of AMR performance is a simple measure which may serve as read-out to monitor disease progression, e.g. in clinical trials.
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.