MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890915487 · doi:10.1186/s13023-018-0898-z

From motor performance to participation: a quantitative descriptive study in adults with autosomal recessive spastic ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay

2018· article· en· W2890915487 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cynthia Gagnon, Bernard Brais, Isabelle Lessard, Caroline Lavoie, Isabelle Côté, Jean Mathieu

Bibliographic record

VenueOrphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMuscular Dystrophy Canada
KeywordsRating scalePhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance (ability)SpasticAtaxiaMedicinePopulationBerg Balance ScalePhysical therapyPsychologyAudiologyCerebral palsyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Autosomal Recessive Spastic Ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS) is a recessive neurological disorder with cerebellar, pyramidal and neuropathic features. Natural history data are urgently needed to increase trial readiness. This study aimed to describe the clinical phenotype including dexterity, coordination, strength, mobility, balance, disease severity, participation, and quality of life observed in adults with ARSACS homozygous for the c.8844delT mutation. METHODS: Cross-sectional study with comparisons between disease stages and with reference values. Outcome measures included Standardized Finger-to-Nose Test, Grip/pinch strength, LEMOCOT, Six-Minute Walk Test, 10-Meter Walk Test, Berg Balance Scale, Spastic Paraplegia Rating Scale, Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia, LIFE-H, and SF-12. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants were recruited with a mean age of 38.1 years. The majority presented with lower limb coordination and fine dexterity scores below three standard deviations compare to reference values, scored under predicted values for mobility measures and were at increased risk of fall. Participants at an earlier disease stage performed better than the others, but individual variability was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results showed overall impaired motor performances and, even in a genetically homogeneous ARSACS population, an individual variability within disease stages. This study lays the foundation for a longitudinal study using quantified measurements.

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)0.002
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 score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrphanet Journal of Rare DiseasesSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207