ArticleCerebellum (London, England)2025
The Cerebellar Neuropsychiatric Rating Scale Version 2: Development and Validation.
Article in Cerebellum (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The CCAS-Scale in Chiari Malformation Type I: A Cerebellar-Focused Cognitive Assessment with Clinical Utility.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Chiari I Malformation as a Human Disease Model of Cerebellar Cognitive-Affective Dysfunction.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Review
- Factor analysis validates the internal structure of the Cerebellar Neuropsychiatric Rating Scale Version 2 and the five domains of cerebellar neuropsychiatry.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The affective component of the cerebellar cognitive affective / Schmahmann syndrome (CCAS) reflects neuropsychiatric symptoms across five domains: attentional control, emotional control, autism spectrum, psychosis spectrum, and social skill set, each with overshoot (hypermetric) and undershoot (hypometric) manifestations. The Cerebellar Neuropsychiatric Rating Scale (CNRS) is a 35-item informant-report questionnaire that detects and quantifies these symptoms. We amended the CNRS items to produce Self- and Informant-Report versions, conducted cognitive debrief to evaluate each item's readability, relevance, and importance, and incorporated patient feedback to generate a 50-item CNRS Version 2 (CNRS-2). We conducted psychometric evaluation via online administration in 43 individuals with cerebellar disorder (CD) and 25 healthy controls (HC) and their respective study-partners at baseline and two weeks later. Internal consistency was adequate, and the CD cohort test-retest reliability was moderate-to-good. CNRS-2 scores were unrelated to motor ataxia severity. Group analysis revealed significant differences between CD and HC mean scores (P < 0.05), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis determined that the groups could be distinguished optimally with scores of 18 and 15 for subjects and study-partners, respectively. There was concordance within subject-partner pairs, however scoring discrepancies were observed for some. CNRS-2 domains correlated highly with other scales, whether conceptually related or not. The CNRS-2 is a comprehensive screening instrument that incorporates the patient perspective and facilitates assessment of the neuropsychiatric component of the CCAS. Its broad scope and ability to detect subclinical symptoms in purportedly HC suggests that it holds promise as a transdiagnostic screening instrument in neuropsychiatry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41348252What 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.