Développement et validation de l’échelle de gravité de l’ataxie récessive spastique de Charlevoix-Saguenay (DSI-ARSACS) : section pyramidale.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Autosomal recessive spastic ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS) is a hereditary and degenerative illness that has a high carrier rate (1/22) in Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean (Quebec, Canada) but that is also found elsewhere around the world. Individuals with ARSACS have cerebellar impairments (ataxia), neuropathic impairments (amyotrophy) and pyramidal impairments (spasticity). ARSACS does not have the same characteristics as other forms of ataxia and there is currently no specific disease severity index (DSI) for it. Method: This project aimed to develop the items of the pyramidal section of the DSI-ARSACS and document their metrological properties. A literature review was conducted to identify ARSACS’ related impairments and existing scales measuring pyramidal impairments. Both items from known scales and new items were used to build a new scale that would assess the pyramidal impairments associated with ARSACS. The scale’s content validation was based on expert opinion. A consensus on the final scale composition was reached. Two physiotherapists administered the newly developed scale to 28 participants with a genetically confirmed ARSACS diagnosis in order to document the reliability of the pyramidal section of the DSI. Existing scales related to pyramidal impairments, mobility, social participation and quality of life were administered to assess convergent construct validity. The contrasting group method (age group, disease stage, gender) was used to assess discriminant validity. Results: Content validity was considered adequate by an expert panel that completed a Delphi process. The pyramidal section’s subscore was distributed normally and did not show a ceiling/floor effect. Convergent construct validity was supported by strong correlations with existing scales measuring related constructs (r > 0.7, p = 0.00), excluding SF-12 v2 (r = 0.09-0.33). Discriminant construct validity was supported by the scale’s ability to distinguish subjects according to age and disease stage. Intra/inter-rater reliability was excellent for individual items (κ[subscript w] = 0.68-0.96/0.60-0.95), except for two items (κ[subscript w] = 0.12 and 0.47), and also excellent for the section’s subscore (CCI = 0.94/0.88, p = 0.000). Internal consistency (α = 0.85) reflected the homogeneity of the pyramidal items. Conclusion: The pyramidal section’s subscore of DSI-ARSACS displayed excellent metrological properties (discriminative and convergent validity, reliability) during this initial validation. The index will lead to a better understanding of ARSACS’ natural history while also allowing for the categorization of subjects participating in future clinical trials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".