ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2026
Establishing meaningful score differences for the observer-reported communication ability (ORCA) measure using the scale judgment approach with caregivers of individuals with Angelman syndrome.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Observer-Reported Communication Ability (ORCA) measure assesses communication ability in individuals living with Angelman syndrome (AS). As gene therapies progress through clinical trials, we need to identify what within-person changes in communication are meaningful to families. This study used the Scale Judgment approach to estimate meaningful score differences (MSDs) on the ORCA measure for AS.
methodsCaregivers (n = 156) of individuals living with AS completed Scale Judgment tasks showing vignette pairs depicting an individual's communication ability before and after a hypothetical, unspecified treatment. Pairs represented four contexts (lower, higher, expressive, and receptive communication) and score difference magnitudes (2, 4, 6, 8 T-score units). We used an item response theory (IRT) model to estimate a threshold parameter for each vignette pair, then fit a quadratic regression of the parameters on the T-score differences to identify the MSD. ORCA T-scores are calibrated to a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 in the AS reference sample.
resultsAcross all contexts, the estimated MSD was 1.80 T-score units (95% CI, 1.11-2.50). Estimates were larger for the lower communication range than higher (2.21 vs. 1.37) and similar for expressive (1.57) and receptive (1.58) communication. When stratified by age, genotype, and baseline score, MSDs varied from 0.82 to 2.58, though confidence intervals overlapped across all comparisons. In exploratory analysis of hypothetical treatment caregivers imagined during the task, estimates were largest among caregivers who reported imagining gene therapy (3.41).
conclusionCaregivers consistently endorsed small score changes as meaningful, suggesting that small treatment effects carry real significance for families. Accounting for variability across contexts and subgroups, we recommend an MSD of 2.0 to 3.5 T-score points on the ORCA measure for individuals with AS, bounded below by the smallest score difference presented to caregivers during the scale judgment task and above by the largest subgroup estimate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42801390What 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.