Developed by Shray Alag, The Harker School
Sections: Correlations,
Clinical Trials, and HPO
Navigate: Clinical Trials and HPO
| Name (Synonyms) | Correlation | |
|---|---|---|
| drug4325 | YinHu QingWen Decoction Wiki | 1.00 |
| drug4756 | standard western medicine treatment Wiki | 1.00 |
| drug4326 | YinHu QingWen Decoction(low dose) Wiki | 1.00 |
Navigate: Correlations HPO
There is one clinical trial.
Children with acquired brain injury (ABI) often struggle with complex impairments, including cognitive (such as memory and attention), social, emotional and behavioral challenges. There is broad agreement that there is a lack of evidence-based knowledge about rehabilitation for children with ABI in the chronic phase. The current study is a feasibility study of a planned randomized controlled trial (RCT), the CICI-intervention, directed towards children with ABI and their families in the chronic phase. The feasibility study aims to evaluate the study protocol, the assessment procedures and the technical solutions prior to performing the RCT. A feasibility study with six participating children and families will be conducted in close collaboration with schools and local health care providers. The intervention to be tested (the CICI-intervention) focuses on the child's and family's individually identified target outcome areas to be addressed, with corresponding rehabilitation goals. The intervention aims to enhance everyday functioning in the home and school environment by reducing ABI-related symptoms, and by attaining rehabilitation goals in areas noted as challenging by the participants. In the future RCT-study the efficacy of the CICI-intervention will be measured in terms of goal attainment, community participation, cognitive, behavioral, social, and family functioning.
Description: The therapists will monitor discrepancies between intervention delivery and the CICI-manual by using extensive checklists relating to each of the intervention sessions. The number of non-delivered treatment components will be counted, and the percentage of deviation will be calculated compared to the total number of treatment components. High feasibility: 15 % deviation or less, Moderate feasibility: 15-25 % deviation, Low feasibility: > 25 % deviation
Measure: Protocol adherence assessed by study-specific checklists Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The total mean score on the Responsiveness subscale (6 items) on the Acceptability Scale, rated by the child, will determine child responsiveness. The responsiveness subscale consists of the following items (the wording adapted to the child's age): I would recommend participating in the study to others, the therapist was warm and understanding, I trusted the therapist, I had the opportunity to state my opinions about the therapist's suggestions, my opinions were taken seriously, I was given sufficient information during the study about the work we were doing. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: Child Responsiveness to the intervention assessed by ratings on the study specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The total mean score on the Responsiveness subscale (6 items) on the Acceptability Scale, rated by the caregiver, will determine caregiver responsiveness. The responsiveness subscale consists if the following items: I would recommend participating in the study to others, the therapist was warm and understanding, I trusted the therapist, I had the opportunity to state my opinions about the therapist's suggestions, my opinions were taken seriously, I was given sufficient information during the study about the work we were doing. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: Caregiver Responsiveness to the intervention assessed by ratings on the study specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The total mean score on the Usefulness subscale (6 items) in the Acceptability Scale will determine perceived usefulness of the intervention. The child version of the usefulness subscale consists of the following items: The program has helped me, the program has helped my family, I would recommend participating in the program to others, I have learned something new that helps me, I have learned more about what I struggle with after the injury, I have learned what I can say to others about what I struggle with due to the injury. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: a. Usefulness of the intervention assessed by child ratings on the study-specific Acceptability Scale for this study Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The total mean score on the Usefulness subscale (9 items) in the Acceptability Scale will determine perceived usefulness of the intervention. The caregiver version of the usefulness subscale consists of the following items: The program has helped my child, the program has helped my family, the program has helped me, I would recommend participating in the program to others, I have gained more insight into my child´s challenges, I will use my new knowledge in the future, I have used my new knowledge in other settings, I found it useful to meet other families who are in a similar situation as we are, the school meetings were useful. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: b. Usefulness of the intervention assessed by caregiver ratings on the study-specific Acceptability Scale for this study. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The therapist will log consent rate of families and schools. High feasibility: ≥ 30%, Moderate feasibility: 15-29%, Low feasibility: <15%
Measure: Recruitment procedures assessed by a) consent rate Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: Therapist will record duration of recruitment procedures, hereunder the telephone screening interview and other telephone calls. High feasibility: 3 hours or less, Moderate feasibility: ˃3 and ≤5 hours, Low feasibility: >5 hours
Measure: Recruitment procedures assessed by b) duration of phone calls and screening interview per family Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: High feasibility: One family excluded at or after baseline, Moderate feasibility: Two families excluded at or after baseline, Low feasibility: More than two families excluded at or after baseline
Measure: Recruitment procedures assessed by c) the number of participants excluded at or after baseline Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: Description: Number of families out of six that participate in the first intervention meeting (after baseline) and complete the entire intervention. High feasibility: Six families completed the intervention, Moderate feasibility: Five families completed the intervention, Low feasibility: Four or fewer families completed the intervention
Measure: Recruitment procedures assessed by d) the number of families that completed the whole intervention Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The total mean score on the following four items in the Acceptability Scale will determine the child burden of the assessment protocol: If the child was comfortable being tested and if the child was comfortable expressing his/her symptoms and opinions through the questionnaires, if the child understood the questionnaires and if the assessment made the child tired. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: The burden of the assessment protocol for the child, reported by the child on the study-specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The total mean score on the following four items in the Acceptability Scale will determine the child burden of the assessment protocol perceived by the caregiver: If the child was comfortable being tested, if the child was comfortable expressing his/her symptoms and opinions through the questionnaires, if the child understood the questionnaires and if the assessment made the child tired. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: The burden of the assessment protocol for the child, reported by caregivers on the study-specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The following item in the Acceptability Scale will determine the caregiver burden of the assessment protocol: There were too many questionnaires. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: The burden of the assessment protocol for the caregivers, reported by caregivers on the study-specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The caregivers' perceived relevance of the topics in caregiver-questionnaires will be measured with two items on the Acceptability Scale: I was able to give important information through the questionnaires, the questionnaires were not relevant for me. Mean score will be calculated. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: Caregiver reported relevance of topics in questionnaires Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The therapist will record the duration of the baseline assessment through logs. High feasibility: ≤ 3hours, Moderate feasibility: ˃3 hours and ˂4 hours, Low feasibility: ≥4 hours
Measure: Therapist reported burden of the baseline assessment measured by the duration of the assessment. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The perceived relevance of working with SMART-goals for the caregivers will be measured with three items on the Acceptability Scale ("The goals we set were important", "The strategies we used for working towards the goals have helped my family", "The strategies we used for working towards the goals have helped my child"). Mean score will be calculated. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: The perceived relevance of working with SMART-goals as rated by caregivers on the study-specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree"). The perceived relevance of working with SMART-goals for the child will be measured with one item on the Acceptability Scale ("The goals we set were important"). High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2.
Measure: The perceived relevance of working with SMART-goals rated by the child on the study-specific Acceptability Scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The therapist records the number of sessions interrupted due to technical failure, per family. High feasibility: Restart of equipment in 0-1 sessions per family, Moderate feasibility: Restart of equipment in 2-3 sessions per family, Low feasibility: Restart of equipment in 4-5 sessions per family.
Measure: Therapist-recorded technical failures in using videoconference in treatment delivery assessed by a study-specific log. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The therapist will record the time spent on installing the technical equipment for video conference use, including software, per family. High feasibility: Installment completed in ≤ 20 minutes in one go, Moderate feasibility: Installment completed in > 20 minutes in one go, Low feasibility: Additional visit required to complete installment.
Measure: Therapist-recorded time spent on installment of the equipment for using videoconference in treatment delivery Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: The study-specific acceptability Scale is rated on a scale from 0 ("Completely disagree") to 4 ("Completely agree") and includes one question concerning the quality of communication through videoconference. The wording is adapted to the children's age, and the children, their parents, and the therapists will rate the question. The mean score will be calculated. High feasibility: Mean score ≥ 3 ("Agree"), Moderate feasibility: Mean score ≥ 2 and < 3, Low feasibility: < 2 on the item assessing quality of communication through videoconference.
Measure: Experienced quality of communication in using videoconference in treatment delivery, assessed by the Acceptability scale. Time: Will be evaluated after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Description: Explored topics: responsiveness to the intervention, usefulness of the intervention, the perceived relevance of working with SMART-goals, and experienced quality of communication in using videoconference in treatment delivery.
Measure: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with all participating children, caregivers and teachers will be conducted to elaborate aspects of feasibility as described above. Time: Will be performed after the intervention period, i.e. 4-5 months after inclusion.Alphabetical listing of all HPO terms. Navigate: Correlations Clinical Trials
Data processed on September 26, 2020.
An HTML report was created for each of the unique drugs, MeSH, and HPO terms associated with COVID-19 clinical trials. Each report contains a list of either the drug, the MeSH terms, or the HPO terms. All of the terms in a category are displayed on the left-hand side of the report to enable easy navigation, and the reports contain a list of correlated drugs, MeSH, and HPO terms. Further, all reports contain the details of the clinical trials in which the term is referenced. Every clinical trial report shows the mapped HPO and MeSH terms, which are also hyperlinked. Related HPO terms, with their associated genes, protein mutations, and SNPs are also referenced in the report.
Drug Reports MeSH Reports HPO Reports