Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42842130›Full record

ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2026

Remote Online-Based Application of the Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome Scale.

Sönke Konrad, Johanna Aschmann, Raquel van der Veen, Kerstin Rubarth, Frank Konietschke, Dagmar Timmann, Andreas Thieme

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

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

7 authors.

Sönke KonradDepartment of Neurology, Essen University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, Essen, 45147, Germany. soenkehannes.konrad@uk-essen.de.
Johanna AschmannDepartment of Neurology, Essen University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.
Raquel van der VeenDepartment of Neurology, Essen University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.
Kerstin RubarthCorporate Member of Freie, Institute for Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, Berlin, 10117, Germany.
Frank KonietschkeCorporate Member of Freie, Institute for Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, Berlin, 10117, Germany.
Dagmar TimmannDepartment of Neurology, Essen University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.
Andreas ThiemeDepartment of Neurology, Essen University Hospital, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstraße 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 437661157Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft FU356/12-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome Scale (CCAS-S) is increasingly used in clinical trials to assess non-motor function in cerebellar disorders, yet its suitability for remote administration has not been evaluated. Using a matched-pairs design, we compared remote, video-based administration of the German CCAS-S (version A) in 22 patients with cerebellar disease and 22 matched controls with at site -testing from a larger, previously tested cohort. Group matching included age, level of education, sex, occupational experience, and ataxia severity. Uncorrected as well as age, education and sex corrected CCAS-S scores were analysed. Test-retest and interrater reliability were assessed in subsets of the remote cohort. Remotely tested patients did not perform worse than at site tested patients regarding the number of failed test items or the total sum raw score. Instead, fewer significant group differences on single test items emerged in the remote cohort between patients and controls compared to the at site tested cohort. Test-retest reliability of remote CCAS-S administration was good in patients and in controls, and interrater reliability was good to excellent. The coefficients were of a similar magnitude as the published values for at site administration, but were not compared statistically because of differences in study design and small subgroup sizes. Remote administration of the CCAS-S is feasible and shows good test-retest and interrater reliability. However, the present cohort-comparison design does not permit conclusions regarding measurement equivalence between remote and at site administration. Until equivalence has been established in a within-subject crossover design, remote and at site CCAS-S data should not be pooled, and remotely assessed patients should be compared against remotely assessed controls.

Indexed as

Cerebellar Cognitive Affective SyndromeAdultAgedFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsReproducibility of ResultsCCAS-SCerebellar ataxiaCerebellar cognitive affective syndromeNeuropsychological testingRemote assessmentTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID42842130
PMCPMC13645978

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.