ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
Advancing observer-reported outcome measurement: development of the MOOD-AS for observing distress in Angelman syndrome.
Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with Angelman syndrome (AS) often experience profound communication impairment and intellectual disability, and as a result, are often unable to self-report on their experiences of emotional distress, including experiences of anxiety. However, existing measures of anxiety primarily depend on verbal descriptions of internal states, making them unsuitable tools for assessing the nature and severity of distress through observer-report for this population. To address this gap, we developed the Measure of Observable Outcomes of Distress in Angelman Syndrome (MOOD-AS), a novel observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) instrument built through a rigorous, caregiver-centered qualitative process focused on observable expressions of distress. METHODOLOGY: Following FDA and ISPOR guidance for clinical outcome assessment development, we conducted concept elicitation interviews with caregivers in the United States and the Netherlands, drafted an initial item pool, mapped items against existing anxiety measures, and performed cognitive interviews to refine the instrument. Concept elicitation interviews were analyzed using content analysis, with saturation of concept assessed quantitatively. Cognitive interviews focused on evaluating item clarity, relevance, and usability.
resultsCaregivers identified 120 and 119 unique observable behaviors and situations in the U.S. (n = 17) and Netherlands (n = 8) sample. Saturation of concept was achieved. Mapping to nine existing anxiety measures revealed substantial gaps in coverage of caregiver-observable behaviors. Cognitive interviews (N = 9) confirmed strong item clarity and relevance, resulting in minor refinements to instructions, severity ratings, and caregiver impact response options. The final MOOD-AS consists of 71 caregiver-centered items assessing observable distress and anxiety-related behaviors. Psychometric properties will be assessed in the next phase of data collection.
conclusionsThe MOOD-AS provides a rigorously developed ObsRO item set with strong qualitative evidence for content validity. Further psychometric evaluation will establish its measurement properties. Its development highlights the importance of systematically integrating caregiver observations when self-report is not feasible and offers a model for future outcome measure development in rare and nonverbal populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.