Parent clinical trial priorities for fragile X syndrome: a best-worst scaling

Best-Worst Scaling Survey of Inpatients' Preferences in Medical Decision-Making Participation in China

This study assesses inpatients' preferences for participating in medical decision-making and determines the factors' rankings in order of importance and whether they vary for respondents with different characteristics. Case 1 best-worst scaling (BWS) was used for the study design. Thirteen attributes influencing inpatient medical decision-making participation were identified based on a literature review and interview results. A balanced incomplete block design was used to form choice sets for the BWS questionnaire for a cross-sectional study examining inpatients' preferences for participating in medical decision-making. Based on results from 814 inpatient participants, the three most important factors influencing inpatients' medical decision-making participation were inpatients' trust in physicians, physicians' professional expertise, and physicians' attitudes. The mixed logit model results reflect the significant heterogeneity in respondents' preferences for shared decision-making. To facilitate resource allocation, improve the physician-patient relationship, and encourage patient decision-making participation more actively and effectively, decision-makers should emphasize patients' trust, enhance physicians' ability to diagnose and treat diseases, and improve their attitudes toward providing care and communication from the perspectives of patients, physicians, and the social environment. Further research is needed on the heterogeneity of patients' preferences for participating in medical decision-making and how to improve patient participation.

GENE TARGET: A framework for evaluating Mendelian neurodevelopmental disorders for gene therapy

Interest in gene-based therapies for neurodevelopmental disorders is increasing exponentially, driven by the rise in recognition of underlying genetic etiology, progress in genomic technology, and recent proof of concept in several disorders. The current prioritization of one genetic disorder over another for development of therapies is driven by competing interests of pharmaceutical companies, advocacy groups, and academic scientists. Although these are all valid perspectives, a consolidated framework will facilitate more efficient and rational gene therapy development. Here we outline features of Mendelian neurodevelopmental disorders that warrant consideration when determining suitability for gene therapy. These features fit into four broad domains: genetics, preclinical validation, clinical considerations, and ethics. We propose a simple mnemonic, GENE TARGET, to remember these features and illustrate how they could be scored using a preliminary scoring rubric. In this suggested rubric, for a given disorder, scores for each feature may be added up to a composite GENE TARGET suitability (GTS) score. In addition to proposing a systematic method to evaluate and compare disorders, our framework helps identify gaps in the translational pipeline for a given disorder, which can inform prioritization of future research efforts.