Management of Patients with Cerebellar Ataxia During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Current Concerns and Future Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current worldwide severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has brought some medical systems to the brink of collapse. This crisis is also negatively impacting the care of patients with non-COVID-19 conditions, including those with cerebellar ataxia (CA). Older patients with CA and those with immune-mediated ataxias on immunosuppressive medication are potentially at high risk of developing serious complications of the infection, although it is also possible that immunosuppressive agents may provide a defense against cytokine storm. This has implications for even greater attention to preventing contracting the disease through physical distancing and/or isolation. The CA patient population is also at higher risk because of the neurological complexities of their underlying disorder and the comorbid medical illnesses that often accompany the genetic ataxias. As the disruption of social patterns and healthcare delivery in response to the crisis continues, interruption of rehabilitation, speech and language therapy, and face-to-face consultations threatens to have a negative impact on the course and well-being of CA patients. Mental and physical health is also potentially at greater risk because the prevailing uncertainty and anxiety may be superimposed upon cerebellum-specific neuropsychological challenges. We identify and review some of the short- and long-term consequences of this global pandemic for the community of ataxia patients and their families and for the clinical and academic neurologists/ataxiologists caring for these patients. This includes the recognition that telemedicine has emerged as a principle means of caregiver-patient contact and that neurological manifestations of COVID-19 including those specific to cerebellar neurobiology are increasingly recognized and will require close surveillance and monitoring. This COVID-19 Cerebellum Task Force consensus provides some guidance on how we may approach this uncertain time and consider preparing for the new realities we face in CA patient care once this acute crisis has passed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".