Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33910590›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2021

Optimizing language for effective communication of gene therapy concepts with hemophilia patients: a qualitative study.

Daniel P Hart, Brian R Branchford, Sarah Hendry, Robert Ledniczky, Robert F Sidonio, Claude Négrier, Michelle Kim, Michelle Rice, Matthew Minshall, Claire Arcé and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Development of a novel gene editing lexicon for hemophilia: methodology and results.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025
    Article
  4. Contemporary approaches to treat people with hemophilia: what's new and what's not?Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Gene Therapy in Hemophilia: Recent Advances.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  15. Defining the Role of Nurses in Gene Therapy for Haemophilia.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniel P HartRoyal London Haemophilia Centre, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University London, London, E1 1BB, UK. d.hart@qmul.ac.uk.
Brian R BranchfordHemophilia and Thrombosis Center, University of Colorado School of Medicine and Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.
Sarah HendryMaslansky + Partners, 200 Varick Street, Suite 601, New York, NY, 10014, USA.
Robert LedniczkyMaslansky + Partners, 200 Varick Street, Suite 601, New York, NY, 10014, USA.
Robert F SidonioAflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Claude NégrierHemophilia and Thrombosis Center, Hôpital Cardiologique, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Michelle KimHemophilia Foundation of Southern California, Pasadena, CA, USA.
Michelle RiceNational Hemophilia Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Matthew MinshallThe Haemophilia Society, London, UK.
Claire ArcéAssociation française des hémophiles, Paris, France.
Steve PrinceBioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., Novato, CA, USA.
Maria KelleherBioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., Novato, CA, USA.
Sharon LeeBioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., Novato, CA, USA.
BioMarin (United States) · USNational Hemophilia Foundation · USAssociation Française de Chirurgie · FRCenter for Cancer and Blood Disorders · USChildren's Hospital Colorado · USLille’s Cardiology Hospital · FRMultiple Sclerosis Society · GBQueen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor communities of people living with hemophilia and other genetic conditions, gene therapy could represent a paradigm shift in treatment strategies. As investigational therapeutic modalities such as gene therapy become more widely used and discussed, there is a critical need for all stakeholders to communicate using a lexicon that is intelligible, accurate, consistent, and representative of novel treatments. In doing so, expectations can be more carefully managed and potential risks, benefits, and limitations better understood. In recognition of this need, a first-ever study of gene therapy lexicon was conducted using established methods of market research and linguistic analysis.

methodsNinety-four participants representing hematologists, nurses, caregivers, and people with hemophilia A, in six countries (US, UK, Spain, Germany, France, Italy) took part in a series of in-depth interviews, face-to-face focus groups, an advisory board meeting, and online group interviews to develop, refine, and test verbal, written, and pictorial language concepts through a three-phase iterative process. Sessions were conducted in local languages using detailed discussion guides. Feedback from participants was captured using real-time instant-response dial testing to measure moment-by-moment emotional responses to language stimuli. Semiquantitative analysis of the responses informed selection of preferred language concepts for final testing, and qualitative discussion explored preference rationale. Participants also completed polling and forced rank and choice written exercises.

resultsStudy feedback showed that the hemophilia community has preferences around consistent lexicon to describe hemophilia and its management. Expert linguistic analysis of feedback from the three phases enabled agreement of a consensus lexicon of vocabulary and an optimized summary narrative for talking about gene therapy amongst people affected by hemophilia A. Preferences were largely consistent across audiences and countries, although some country-specific recommendations were made. A representative summary phrase was agreed: "Gene therapy is being studied in clinical trials with the aim to allow the body to produce factor VIII protein on its own".

conclusionsThe use of preferred language across different stakeholders increases understanding and comfort during discussions of novel and complex therapeutic modalities such as gene therapy. Consistent use of community-informed lexicon minimizes miscommunication and facilitates informed decision-making regarding potential future treatment opportunities.

Indexed as

Hemophilia AFranceGenetic TherapyGermanyHumansItalyLanguageSpainAdeno-associated virus (AAV)CommunicationConsensusGene therapyGene transferHemophilia ALanguageLexiconQualitative researchVocabulary

Identifiers

PMID33910590
PMCPMC8082836
OpenAlexW3158318636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.