SynthesisTremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.)2026
Diagnostic Accuracy of the Archimedes Spiral Test for Essential Tremor: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Archimedes spiral test is widely used in clinical neurology to evaluate tremor, yet its diagnostic performance for essential tremor (ET) remains unclear and methodologically inconsistent across studies. Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the Archimedes spiral test for distinguishing ET from healthy controls (HC) and to identify methodological and technological factors associated with improved performance. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420251167793). Eight studies (1,046 participants) were included. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2. Pooled diagnostic accuracy was estimated using a random-effects model, and subgroup/meta-regression analyses examined the impact of digital acquisition, AI algorithms, EMG/accelerometry, and execution parameters. Results: The pooled diagnostic accuracy was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.77-0.95; I² = 75.4%). Technology-assisted methods (digital capture or AI-based analysis) demonstrated higher accuracy (0.91; 95% CI: 0.79-0.96) than manual approaches (0.78; 95% CI: 0.70-0.84), although differences did not reach statistical significance. Exploratory analyses suggested that medication withdrawal, absence of arm support, digital recording, and standardized execution protocols may contribute to improved diagnostic performance. Conclusions: The Archimedes spiral shows moderate-to-high diagnostic accuracy for ET, particularly when combined with digital acquisition and objective analytic methods. Given the small number of available studies and substantial methodological heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted as exploratory. Standardized digital protocols may enhance reproducibility and support the development of scalable, clinic-ready tremor biomarkers.
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.