MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Episodic Ataxia Type 1: Natural History, Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Symptoms. (S32.004)

2015· article· en· W1223042760 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tracey D. Graves, Robert C. Griggs, Brian N. Bundy, Joanna C. Jen, Robert W. Baloh, Michael Hanna

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural historyMedicineAtaxiaQuality of life (healthcare)PediatricsGerontologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To obtain quantitative data on the progression of episodic ataxia type 1 (EA1) over two years, to characterize the course of the condition and provide a baseline for future clinical trials. BACKGROUND: EA1 is a rare disorder clinically characterized by brief attacks of unsteadiness, dizziness and myokymia without nystagmus and is genetically defined by heterozygous mutations in the potassium channel encoding gene, KCNA1. As no prospective studies have been performed, the impact of the disease on patients over time is therefore unknown. DESIGN/METHODS: We designed a multi-center, prospective, longitudinal natural history study. Participants were recruited from sites in the USA, Canada and the UK between September 2006 and March 2010. They were followed at yearly intervals for three visits. Outcome measures included a standardized symptom interview, a SARA score (a standardized measure of cerebellar dysfunction on examination), the Short Form-36 (SF36) quality of life measure and standardized assessment of Activities of Daily Living. Subjects also used an automated interactive telephone-based voice response diary to record symptoms observed, as well as the frequency and severity of attacks for 8 weeks following their annual visits. RESULTS: 33 patients were enrolled. One year follow up data is available for 24 participants and two year follow up for 19 participants. The findings for the SARA, activities of daily living scale, SF-36 and IVR are presented. The utility of these measures to document change will also be discussed. On all measures, very little progression was noted in individuals over a two year period, suggesting that any future drug trial would show benefit during this timescale, if the drug were efficacious. CONCLUSIONS: This large prospective study of EA1 provides the first documentation of the natural history of this disorder and will provide guidance for the design of future clinical trials. Supported by: DHHS/PHS/NIH grant 2U54NS059065-07.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology→Same topicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases→French-language works237,207→