MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406311084 · doi:10.1007/s40120-024-00708-4

Measurement Properties of the Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia

2025· article· en· W4406311084 on OpenAlexaff
Michele Potashman, Evan Popoff, Lauren Powell, Melissa Beiner, Ainsley Mackenzie, Vlad Coric, S. H. Subramony, Matthis Synofzik, Jeremy D. Schmahmann, Gilbert L’Italien

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology and Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinocerebellar ataxiaAtaxiaRating scaleCohortMedicineActivities of daily livingPhysical therapyPromConvergent validityPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychometricsPsychologyInternal consistencyInternal medicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale-Activities of Daily Living (FARS-ADL) is a valid, highly utilized measure for assessing ADL impacts in patients with Friedreich ataxia. We provide evidence of the psychometric validity of the FARS-ADL in two cohorts of patients with spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA). METHODS: Using data from a cohort of real-world subjects with SCA (recruited at Massachusetts General Hospital [MGH]; n = 33) and a phase 3 trial of troriluzole in adults with SCA (NCT03701399 [Study 206]; n = 217), comprising a subset of patients with the SCA3 genotype (n = 89), the psychometric measurement properties and minimal change thresholds of the FARS-ADL were examined. RESULTS: = 0.86-0.87), and item-to-total correlations were acceptable (r = 0.55-0.89 per item). Convergent and divergent validity were supported with strong correlations demonstrated between FARS-ADL and scales measuring similar concepts (Neuro-QOL [Upper], Neuro-QOL [Lower], PROM-ADL, PROM-PHYS, and FARS-FUNC; all P < 0.001) and weaker correlations shown between measures of differing constructs. A two- to three-point threshold for meaningful changes was supported as 0.5 × SD = 2.43, SEM = 2.19. Mean changes from baseline for subjects classified as "improved," "no change," or "deteriorated" were -0.54, 0.22, and 1.47, respectively. Similar trends were observed in the Study 206 all-SCA and SCA3 cohorts. CONCLUSION: Psychometric evaluation showed that the FARS-ADL performed well on analyses examining the reliability and validity of the measure and can detect meaningful changes in patients with SCA, including those with SCA3. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03701399 (Study 206).

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology and TherapySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207