Patient-reported, psychosocial and health economic outcomes in mild to moderate Friedreich's ataxia: baseline results of the PROFA study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Friedreich ataxia (FA) is the most common autosomal recessive ataxia. Little attention has been paid to FA's impact on patient-reported, psychosocial, and health-economic outcomes. This study aimed to report these outcomes across FA's disability stages 1-5. Methods: We assessed patients in Germany, France, and Austria as part of the PROFA study, a European multicenter observational study. The protocol included a study center visit followed by a remote mobile assessment capturing ataxia severity (SARA), daily living deficits (FARS-ADL), cognitive and affective impairments (CCAS), health-related quality of life (HRQoL: PROM-Ataxia short-form, EQ-5D-5L), mental well-being (WEMWBS), communication disabilities (COMATAX), and healthcare and informal care utilization. FARS disability stages were used to demonstrate outcomes with effect size measures (Eta-Squared, Cramér's V). Multivariate regression models evaluated associations between z-standardized outcomes and disability stages. Findings: One hundred one patients (mean [SD]: age 35.0 [11.5]; GAA-repeat size 657 [299]; 50.5% women) were included. Activities of daily living, HRQoL, communication disabilities, and informal care utilization worsened significantly across disability stages with moderate to high effect sizes. Cognitive-affective impairments and mental well-being showed significant associations with small effect sizes. Twenty-three patients (33.3%) received formal care, while 40 (58.0%) received informal care (mean 12.2 h/week). Omaveloxolone was used by 33 patients (32.7%). Annual healthcare costs excluding Omaveloxolone were €13,620 (payer) and €32,679 (societal perspective, including informal care and productivity losses). Interpretation: The results emphasize the multidimensional patient, societal, and economic burden of FA and the need for comprehensive care addressing physical, mental, and psychosocial health. Funding: European Joint Programme on Rare Diseases (EJP RD).
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".