A Conceptual Model of Angelman Syndrome and Review of Relevant Clinical Outcomes Assessments (COAs)

Joseph C. Grieco (), Beverly Romero, Emuella Flood, Raquel Cabo and Jeannie Visootsak
Additional contact information
Joseph C. Grieco: Ovid Therapeutics
Beverly Romero: ICON
Emuella Flood: ICON
Raquel Cabo: Ovid Therapeutics
Jeannie Visootsak: Ovid Therapeutics

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2019, vol. 12, issue 1, No 6, 97-112

Abstract: Abstract Background Angelman syndrome (AS) is a rare, neurological genetic disorder for which no clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) or conceptual models (CM) have been developed. Objective This study aimed to identify symptoms and impacts relevant and important in this patient population and develop a conceptual model of AS, and to evaluate the content validity of selected COA instruments with potential for inclusion in clinical studies of AS to capture treatment benefit. Methods For both concept elicitation (CE) and cognitive interviews (CI), caregivers of children, adolescents, and adults with AS and clinicians with AS experience were targeted. For CI, clinicians discussed the Modified Performance-Oriented Mobility Assessment (MPOMA-G) and ProtoKinetics Zeno Walkway™ and caregivers reviewed the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory Computer Adaptive Test (PEDI-CAT), the Anxiety, Depression and Mood Scale (ADAMS), the Aberrant Behavior Checklist–Community (ABC-C), and the Morning Diary. Results Four clinicians and 34 caregivers participated in CE interviews; three clinicians and 36 caregivers participated in CI. A conceptual model, initially informed by literature, was refined based on interview data. Five domains of symptoms, signs, and characteristics of AS were identified: cognitive and executive functioning, social-emotional, emotional-expressive behavior, sensory-compulsive behavior, and physical. Patient impacts were identified in three domains: activities of daily living, school, and social/community. Caregiver impacts were identified in five domains: mental health, physical health, work, home, and social. While all instruments demonstrated the ability to provide relevant data for the AS population, each instrument either contained some items irrelevant to individuals with AS or was missing important concepts based on the interviews. No single instrument covered all relevant domains specific to AS. Conclusion Future work should consider the adaptation of existing COAs and the development of a novel AS-specific instrument for use in clinical research to ensure outcomes important to this patient population are captured.

Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-018-0323-7 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:12:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-018-0323-7

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-018-0323-7

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().