Translation and validation into Brazilian version of the Scale of the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA);Tradução e validação da escala para avaliação e graduação de ataxia (SARA) para versão Brasileira

Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria

Volumn 68, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 228-230

  Braga Neto, Pedro ^a   Godeiro Junior, Clecio ^a   Dutra, Lívia Almeida ^a   Pedroso, José Luiz ^a   Barsottini, Orlando Graziani Povoas ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Cerebellar ataxia; International cooperative ataxia rating scale; Scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATAXIA; BRAZIL; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE ATAXIA RATING SCALE; MALE; MATHEMATICAL AND STATISTICAL PROCEDURES; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; SCALE OF THE ASSESSMENT AND RATING OF ATAXIA; VALIDITY;

EID: 77953744634     PISSN: 0004282X     EISSN: 16784227     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/S0004-282X2010000200014     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Mariotti C, Fancellu R, Di Donato. An overview of the patient with ataxia. J Neurol 2005; 252:511-518.
2. Klockgether T. Hereditary ataxias. In: Jankovic J, Tolosa E (Eds). ParkinsonÅfs disease & movement disorders. 5th Ed. Philadelphia: Lippicott Wiliiams & Wilkins, 2007:421-435.
3. Trouillas P, Takayanagi T, Hallett M, et al. International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale for pharmacological assessment of the cerebellar syndrome: The Ataxia Neuropharmacology Committee of the World Federation of Neurology. J Neurol Sci 1997;145:205-211.
4. Storey E, Tuck K, Hester R, Hughes A, Churchyard A. Inter-rater reliability of the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (ICARS). Mov Disord 2004;19: 190-192.
5. Schmitz-Hübsch T, du Montcel ST, Baliko L, et al. Reliability and validity of the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale: a study in 156 spinocerebellar ataxia patients. Mov Disord 2006;21:699-704.
6. Schmitz-Hübsch T, du Montcel ST, Baliko L, et al. Scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia: development of a new clinical scale. Neurology 2006; 66:1717-1720.
7. Weyer A, Abele M, Schmitz-Hubsch T, et al. Reliability and validity of the scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia: a study in 64 ataxia patients. Mov Disord 2007;22:1633-1637.
8. Yabe I, Matsushima M, Soma H, Basri R, Sasaki H. Usefulness of the Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA). J Neurol Sci 2008;15:164-166.
9. Subramony SH, May W, Lynch D, et al. Measuring Friedreich ataxia: interrater reliability of a neurologic rating scale. Neurology 2005; 64:1261-1262.
10. Wenning GK, Tison F, Seppi K, et al. Development and validation of the Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale (UMSARS). Mov Disord 2004; 19: 1391-402.
11. Schmahmann JD, Gardner R, Macmore J, Vangel MG. Development of a brief ataxia rating scale (BARS) based on a modified form of the ICARS. Mov Disord 2009; 15:1820-1828.
12. Bürk K, Mälzig U, Wolf S, et al. Comparison of three clinical rating scales in Friedreich ataxia (FRDA). Mov Disord 2009; 24:1779-1784.
13. Trujillo-Martín M, Serrano-Aguilar P, Monton-Alvarez F, Carrillo-Fumero R. Effectiveness and safety of treatments for degenerative ataxias: a systematic review. Mov Disord 2009; 24: 1111-2114.