ArticleNeurology and therapy2026
Incorporating Patient Perspectives into a Composite Score for Measuring Disease Progression in Spinocerebellar Ataxia (SCA).
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe spinocerebellar ataxia composite score (SCACOMS) comprises items from the functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (f-SARA) and the Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGI-C). In the derivation of SCACOMS, weights reflecting 1-year responsiveness were assigned to each item using partial least squares (PLS) regression modeling. The current objective was to incorporate patient-feedback into the SCACOMS item weights, examine corresponding responsiveness of the composite scale, and discuss potential implications for future use.
methodsItem weights derived by PLS regression were compared to each item's relative importance as assigned by 16 patients with SCA during semi-structured interviews. SCACOMS item weights were adjusted using the following combinations: (1) 50/50 weighted combination of PLS and patient weights and (2) reducing the weight of CGI-C to 20% and averaging individual item weights obtained from each perspective. The 1-year mean to standard deviation ratios (MSDRs) for the resulting reweighted scales were compared, with larger MSDRs indicating greatest sensitivity to disease progression.
resultsThe PLS-derived SCACOMS had the highest MSDR (0.99). When item weights were averaged across the two sources, the resulting MSDR was 0.91. When the weight of CGI-C was set to 20%, reflecting patient preferences for higher weights on the discrete symptoms, the MSDR was 0.79.
conclusionsThis study took a novel approach to enhance the face validity of SCACOMS by incorporating patient feedback into the statistically optimized item weights. The result is the merging of objectively derived item weightings (reflecting optimal scale responsiveness) with patient-assigned relevance. While this update may increase the patient centricity of a composite measure, this comes at the expense of reduced sensitivity. This potential trade-off in sensitivity to detect change should be evaluated in the context of the composite measure's intended use.
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.