A Modified Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Rating Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Rating Scale is a prospectively validated physician-rated measure of disease severity for progressive supranuclear palsy. We hypothesized that, according to experts' opinion, individual scores of items would differ in relevance for patients' quality of life, functionality in daily living, and mortality. Thus, changes in the score may not equate to clinically meaningful changes in the patient's status. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to establish a condensed modified version of the scale focusing on meaningful disease milestones. METHODS: Sixteen movement disorders experts evaluated each scale item for its capacity to capture disease milestones (0 = no, 1 = moderate, 2 = severe milestone). Items not capturing severe milestones were eliminated. Remaining items were recalibrated in proportion to milestone severity by collapsing across response categories that yielded identical milestone severity grades. Items with low sensitivity to change were eliminated, based on power calculations using longitudinal 12-month follow-up data from 86 patients with possible or probable progressive supranuclear palsy. RESULTS: The modified scale retained 14 items (yielding 0-2 points each). The items were rated as functionally relevant to disease milestones with comparable severity. The modified scale was sensitive to change over 6 and 12 months and of similar power for clinical trials of disease-modifying therapy as the original scale (achieving 80% power for two-sample t test to detect a 50% slowing with n = 41 and 25% slowing with n = 159 at 12 months). CONCLUSIONS: The modified Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Rating Scale may serve as a clinimetrically sound scale to monitor disease progression in clinical trials and routine. © 2021 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".