Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Cerebellum. 2022 Aug 12;22(5):790–809. doi: 10.1007/s12311-022-01424-1

Table 5.

Correlations between CAG repeat length and S-Factor slopes against SARA slopes, BARS slopes, and Functional stage slopes; and SARA slope against BARS slope and Functional stage slopes

Correlate 1 Correlate 2 SCA1 SCA2 SCA3 SCA6
CAG SARA slope r(54)=0.285, p=.033 r(59)=0.18, p=.166 r(119)=0.145, p=.113 r(50)= −0.023, p=.869
BARS slope r(10)=−0.142, p=.661 r(7)=0.230, p=.552 r(11)=0.271, p=.370 r(8)= −0.579, p=.079
Functional stage slope r(48)= −0.088, p=.546 r(53)=0.039, p=.780 r(107)=0.123, p=.201 r(50)= −0.128, p=0.365
S-Factor slope SARA slope r(52)=0.333, p=.014 r(54)=0.217, p=.108 r(119)=0.152, p=.096 r(48)= −0.024, p=0.868
BARS slope r(8)=0.001, p=.999 r(4)= −0.178, p=.735 r(11)=0.268, p=.375 r(7)= −0.582, p=.100
Functional stage slope r(46)= −0.027, p=.856 r(50)=0.031, p=.826 r(107)=0.128, p=.185 r(48)= −0.129, p=.370
SARA slope BARS slope r(10)=0.781, p=.003 r(8)= −0.147, p=.685 r(12)=0.564, p=.036 r(8)= −0.272, p=.447
Functional stage slope r(58)=0.208, p=.110 r(66)=0.021, p=.865 r(132)=0.261, p=.002 r(66)=0.439, p<.001
r(65)=0.392, p=.001^
^

Correlation repeated after excluding outlier