Digital health metrics reveal upper limb impairment profiles in ARSACS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Adults with autosomal recessive spastic ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS) often present with reduced upper limb coordination affecting their independence in daily life. Previous studies in ARSACS identified reduced performance in clinical assessments requiring fine and gross dexterity as well as prehension. However, the kinematic and kinetic aspects underlying reduced upper limb coordination in ARSACS have not been systematically investigated yet. In this work, we aimed to provide a detailed characterization of alterations in upper limb movement patterns and hand grip forces in 57 participants with ARSACS. METHODS: We relied on a goal-directed technology-aided assessment task, which provides eight previously validated digital health metrics describing movement efficiency, smoothness, speed, and grip force control. RESULTS: First, we observed that 98.3% of the participants were impaired in at least one of the metrics, that all metrics are significantly impaired on a population level, and that grip force control during precise manipulations is most commonly and strongly impaired. Second, we identified high inter-participant variability in the kinematic and kinetic impairment profiles, thereby capturing different clinical profiles subjectively observed in this population. Lastly, abnormal goal-directed task performance in ARSACS could be best explained by reduced movement speed, efficiency, and especially force control during precise manipulations, while abnormal movement smoothness did not have a significant effect. INTERPRETATION: This work helped to refine the clinical profile of ARSACS and highlights the need for characterizing individual kinematic and kinetic impairment profiles in clinical trials in ARSACS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".