ReviewCerebellum (London, England)2024
Quantitative Speech Assessment in Ataxia-Consensus Recommendations by the Ataxia Global Initiative Working Group on Digital-Motor Markers.
Review in Cerebellum (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of cerebellar repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation plus physiotherapy in spinocerebellar ataxias - A randomized clinical trial.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Trial
- Development and validation of the dysarthria impact scale: a patient-reported outcome for motor speech disorders.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- A digital measure of eye movements during reading sensitively captures oculomotor and speech dysfunction, early changes, and disease progression in ataxias.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Developing digital health technologies for frontotemporal degeneration.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Review
- Speech and language biomarkers for Parkinson's disease prediction, early diagnosis and progression.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Psychiatry: A Review of Biological and Behavioral Data Analyses.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Multimodal Digital Phenotyping of Behavior in a Neurology Clinic: Development of the Neurobooth Platform and the First Two Years of Data Collection.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Clinical and cognitive assessment in Friedreich ataxia clinical trials: a review.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Optimizing Communication in Ataxia: A Multifaceted Approach to Alternative and Augmentative Communication (AAC).Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dysarthria is a common and debilitating symptom of many neurodegenerative diseases, including those resulting in ataxia. Changes to speech lead to significant reductions in quality of life, impacting the speaker in most daily activities. Recognition of its importance as an objective outcome measure in clinical trials for ataxia is growing. Its viability as an endpoint across the disease spectrum (i.e. pre-symptomatic onwards) means that trials can recruit ambulant individuals and later-stage individuals who are often excluded because of difficulty completing lower limb tasks. Here we discuss the key considerations for speech testing in clinical trials including hardware selection, suitability of tasks and their role in protocols for trials and propose a core set of tasks for speech testing in clinical trials. Test batteries could include forms suitable for remote short, sensitive and easy to use, with norms available in several languages. The use of artificial intelligence also could improve accuracy and automaticity of analytical pipelines in clinic and trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.