Optimizing selectivity of the Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome Scale by use of correction formulas, and validation of its German version

The correction formulas improved diagnostic accuracy of the CCAS-Scale, particularly for the sum raw score. Therefore, we recommend using the corrected sum raw score for evaluation instead of the uncorrected number of failed items, proposed originally Hoche (Brain 141:248-270, 2018). Some test items, however, did not differentiate well between patients and controls and MDCs were large, highlighting the need for refined CCAS assessment instruments as progression or treatment outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neurology
Published
2025-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-025-13083-3
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Vestibular and auditory disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.21

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Optimizing selectivity of the Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome Scale by use of correction formulas, and validation of its German version

Imis Dogan, Frank Konietschke, Martina Minnerop, Benedikt Frank et al.
5 citations
Journal of Neurology
Vestibular and auditory disorders
4.21
article

Optimizing selectivity of the Cerebellar Cognitive Affective Syndrome Scale by use of correction formulas, and validation of its German version

Imis Dogan, Frank Konietschke, Martina Minnerop, Benedikt Frank, Adam M. Berlijn, Patricia Sulzer, Kerstin Rubarth, Johanna Müller, Dana M. Huvermann, Matthis Synofzik, Kathrin Reetz, Saskia Elben, Raquel van der Veen, Martin Köhrmann, Jennifer Faber, Julia-Elisabeth Aktories, Dagmar Timmann, Elke Wondzinski, Heike Jacobi, Friedrich Erdlenbruch, Andreas Thieme, Miriam Barkhoff, Jürgen Konczak, Giorgi Batsikadze, Qi Liu, Thomas Klockgether, Sandra Röske, Mario Siebler
article en
5 citations

Abstract

The correction formulas improved diagnostic accuracy of the CCAS-Scale, particularly for the sum raw score. Therefore, we recommend using the corrected sum raw score for evaluation instead of the uncorrected number of failed items, proposed originally Hoche (Brain 141:248-270, 2018). Some test items, however, did not differentiate well between patients and controls and MDCs were large, highlighting the need for refined CCAS assessment instruments as progression or treatment outcomes.

Journal of NeurologyVol. 272(5)
University of Minnesota (US), University of Bonn (DE), Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE), Heidelberg University (DE), University Hospital Bonn (DE), German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DE), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), Essen University Hospital (DE), Jülich Aachen Research Alliance (DE), Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE), Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research (DE), Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE), University of Duisburg-Essen (DE), Freie Universität Berlin (DE), RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Universitätsklinikum Essen, European Commission, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Vestibular and auditory disorders
4.21
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.