Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42806209›Full record

SynthesisCerebellum (London, England)2026

Prevalence of Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome in Patients with Cerebellar Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Tokuaki Shinya, Shota Tanaka, Kota Yamauchi, Keisuke Kanou, Masaki Karasuyama, Shuhei Yamamoto, Kenichi Nishie, Shohei Kawachi, Manaka Shibuya, Shuji Arakawa

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Tokuaki ShinyaDepartment of Rehabilitation, Steel Memorial Yawata Hospital, Kitakyushu, Japan. tokuaki.8227@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0664-3376
Shota TanakaDepartment of Rehabilitation, Steel Memorial Yawata Hospital, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Kota YamauchiDepartment of Rehabilitation, Steel Memorial Yawata Hospital, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Keisuke KanouDepartment of Rehabilitation, Steel Memorial Yawata Hospital, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Masaki KarasuyamaDepartment of Rehabilitation, Minamikawa Orthopedic Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.
Shuhei YamamotoDepartment of Rehabilitation, Shinshu University Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan.
Kenichi NishieDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, HARUHI Respiratory Medical Hospital, Haruhinagare, Japan.
Shohei KawachiGraduate School of Medical Sciences, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan.
Manaka ShibuyaDepartment of Rehabilitation, Kitasato University Hospital, Sagamihara, Japan.
Shuji ArakawaDepartment of Neurology, Steel Memorial Yawata Hospital, Kitakyushu, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome (CCAS) is increasingly recognized across cerebellar disorders, but its prevalence remains uncertain because study populations and assessment methods vary. We systematically evaluated CCAS prevalence across cerebellar disorders and synthesized estimates according to assessment method. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and two trial registries were searched from inception to November 5, 2025, without language restrictions. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Studies using conventional neuropsychological assessments were included in the review but excluded from the meta-analysis because of their small number and methodological heterogeneity and were summarized descriptively. CCAS-Scale studies were pooled using random-effects models. Fifteen studies in 17 publications (712 participants) were included; five were at high risk of bias. Two conventional neuropsychological studies reported CCAS prevalence of 22.2% and 55.6%. Among 13 CCAS-Scale studies, pooled definite CCAS prevalence was 67% (95% CI, 53%-79%; I² = 91.0%; τ² = 0.21). In 11 studies reporting all four categories, proportions were 7% for no CCAS, 18% for possible, 15% for probable, and 62% for definite CCAS. Sensitivity analyses yielded estimates of 65%-69%, with persistent heterogeneity. Egger's test suggested small-study effects (p = 0.009). Definite CCAS was frequently identified using the CCAS-Scale, but considerable heterogeneity limits application of the pooled estimate to individual patients or clinical populations. The CCAS-Scale should be interpreted as a screening tool, with comprehensive neuropsychological assessment considered when clinically indicated. Standardized criteria and within-participant validation are needed.

Indexed as

Cerebellar Cognitive Affective SyndromeCerebellar DiseasesHumansNeuropsychological TestsPrevalenceCerebellar cognitive affective syndromeCerebellar cognitive affective syndrome scaleCerebellar diseasesNeuropsychological testsPrevalence

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.