ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2026
Validation of the SODA in Spinocerebellar Ataxia Type 2.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oculomotor disturbances hallmark hereditary ataxias. While video-oculography provides biomarkers, clinical tools like the Scale for Ocular Motor Disorders in Ataxia (SODA) offer reliable, specific bedside assessment, but the scale has not been validated in specific subtypes of cerebellar ataxias. This study aimed to determine the usefulness of the SODA in a Cuban cohort of Spinocerebellar Ataxia type 2 (SCA2) patients and to assess relationship of SODA scores with disease severity scores and quality of life measures. The original SODA underwent forward and backward translation into Spanish, followed by a pilot study to assess comprehensibility. The validation study included evaluations of internal consistency, discriminant validity, and convergent validity in 47 individuals with SCA2 (9 in the prodromal stage) and 30 sex- and age-matched healthy controls. Complementary instruments assessed cerebellar and non-cerebellar motor parameters, cognitive function, and quality of life. Despite the SODA scale’s low internal consistency (α = 0.557) due to poor contribution from the saccadic intrusions, ocular alignment, and nystagmus items, it demonstrated excellent discriminant validity (p < 0.0001 vs. controls, including preclinical cases). The most frequent deficits were horizontal saccade slowing and dysmetria, observed in 95.7% of the whole cohort and 77.8% of preclinical carriers. The SODA score correlated significantly with the INAS oculomotor count (supporting concurrent validity), as well as SARA, CAG repeats, and quality-of-life measures. This study validates the SODA for detecting oculomotor deficits in SCA2, including prodromal stages. These findings underscore its potential as a bedside tool for tracking integrated disease burden in future clinical trials and management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41831049What 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.