↓ Skip to main content

MRI-based cerebellar volume measurements correlate with the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale score in patients with spinocerebellar degeneration or multiple system atrophy

Overview of attention for article published in Cerebellum & Ataxias, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
MRI-based cerebellar volume measurements correlate with the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale score in patients with spinocerebellar degeneration or multiple system atrophy
Published in
Cerebellum & Ataxias, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40673-016-0052-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daisuke Hara, Futaba Maki, Shigeaki Tanaka, Rie Sasaki, Yasuhiro Hasegawa

Abstract

Progression of clinical symptoms and cerebellar atrophy may vary among subtypes of spinocerebellar degeneration and multiple system atrophy. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to demonstrate the relationship between the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS) score and cerebellar volume derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a broad spectrum of Japanese patients with cerebellar ataxia. A total of 86 patients with cerebellar ataxia (18 with cortical cerebellar atrophy, 34 with spinocerebellar ataxia, and 34 with multiple system atrophy) and 30 healthy subjects were studied. MRI-based cerebellar volume measurements were performed in all subjects using T1-weighted images acquired with a 1.5-T MRI scanner. The cerebellar volume/cranial anteroposterior (AP) diameter was used for statistical analysis. Stepwise multiple regression analyses demonstrated that cerebellar volume/cranial AP diameter and midbrain AP/cranial AP diameter were significantly associated with the total score and domain I sub-score of ICARS. We found no interactions between these two anatomical factors in the ICARS total and domain I sub-scores. The main effects of these two predictors were statistically significant both in total and domain I sub-scores (p = 0.001 and 0.022, respectively). Cerebellar volume and midbrain AP diameter normalized to the cranial AP diameter were significantly correlated with the ICARS total and domain I sub-scores. Further longitudinal studies are warranted to explore the role of these MRI biomarkers for predicting disease progression.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 34%
Neuroscience 11 34%
Psychology 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 February 2019.
All research outputs
#15,381,002
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Cerebellum & Ataxias
#59
of 103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,595
of 342,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cerebellum & Ataxias
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,741 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them