The FOG-COA Protocol: Validation of Freezing of Gait Clinical Outcomes Assessments in Parkinson's Disease

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Erika E. Howe, Pieter Ginis, Kaylena A. Ehgoetz Martens, Moran Gilat, Martina Mancini, J. Lucas Mckay, Jorik Nonnekes, Jennifer Mammen, Jamie L. Adams, David Cella, Alice Nieuwboer, Fay Horak, Simon J. G. Lewis, Jeffrey M. Hausdorff
{"title":"The FOG-COA Protocol: Validation of Freezing of Gait Clinical Outcomes Assessments in Parkinson's Disease","authors":"Erika E. Howe,&nbsp;Pieter Ginis,&nbsp;Kaylena A. Ehgoetz Martens,&nbsp;Moran Gilat,&nbsp;Martina Mancini,&nbsp;J. Lucas Mckay,&nbsp;Jorik Nonnekes,&nbsp;Jennifer Mammen,&nbsp;Jamie L. Adams,&nbsp;David Cella,&nbsp;Alice Nieuwboer,&nbsp;Fay Horak,&nbsp;Simon J. G. Lewis,&nbsp;Jeffrey M. Hausdorff","doi":"10.1111/ejn.70701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The development and evaluation of novel treatment options for freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease have been limited by an ambiguous definition and lack of standardized clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that 1) reliably assess FOG severity, 2) are responsive to change, and 3) capture patient-relevant impact. To address these gaps, working groups from the International Consortium on FOG (ICFOG) developed a clinician-rated outcome—the Giladi Protocol for assessing FOG severity (GP-FOG), and a patient-reported outcome—the FOG Quality of Life questionnaire (FOG-QOL). The FOG-COA project will evaluate the conceptual framework and psychometric properties of these COAs to determine their fit-for-purpose in clinical trials. A total of 105 freezers and 35 non-freezers from seven international centers will complete the GP-FOG in the dopaminergic OFF and ON states during two separate visits (7–14 days apart). FOG annotations from video recordings will be used to assess criterion validity. OFF and ON GP-FOG scores from two trained raters at Visit 1, as well as within-rater scores across visits, will examine reliability. Responsiveness will be evaluated by comparing effect sizes between OFF and ON GP-FOG scores. Patient meaningfulness will be assessed through the association between patient-perceived FOG severity and GP-FOG scores. Participants will complete the FOG-QOL at each visit to assess test–retest reliability and validity against the NFOGQ and PDQ-8. A subset of freezers will undergo cognitive interviews to identify relevant daily life FOG impacts and evaluate FOG-QOL meaningfulness. Collectively, this work will advance standardized, sensitive, and meaningful FOG-COAs, supporting regulatory-grade endpoints and the development of a multi-dimensional outcome framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":11993,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Neuroscience","volume":"64 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ejn.70701","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejn.70701","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The development and evaluation of novel treatment options for freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease have been limited by an ambiguous definition and lack of standardized clinical outcome assessments (COAs) that 1) reliably assess FOG severity, 2) are responsive to change, and 3) capture patient-relevant impact. To address these gaps, working groups from the International Consortium on FOG (ICFOG) developed a clinician-rated outcome—the Giladi Protocol for assessing FOG severity (GP-FOG), and a patient-reported outcome—the FOG Quality of Life questionnaire (FOG-QOL). The FOG-COA project will evaluate the conceptual framework and psychometric properties of these COAs to determine their fit-for-purpose in clinical trials. A total of 105 freezers and 35 non-freezers from seven international centers will complete the GP-FOG in the dopaminergic OFF and ON states during two separate visits (7–14 days apart). FOG annotations from video recordings will be used to assess criterion validity. OFF and ON GP-FOG scores from two trained raters at Visit 1, as well as within-rater scores across visits, will examine reliability. Responsiveness will be evaluated by comparing effect sizes between OFF and ON GP-FOG scores. Patient meaningfulness will be assessed through the association between patient-perceived FOG severity and GP-FOG scores. Participants will complete the FOG-QOL at each visit to assess test–retest reliability and validity against the NFOGQ and PDQ-8. A subset of freezers will undergo cognitive interviews to identify relevant daily life FOG impacts and evaluate FOG-QOL meaningfulness. Collectively, this work will advance standardized, sensitive, and meaningful FOG-COAs, supporting regulatory-grade endpoints and the development of a multi-dimensional outcome framework.

fogg - coa方案:帕金森病步态冻结临床结果评估的验证
帕金森病步态冻结(FOG)的新治疗方案的开发和评估受到定义模糊和缺乏标准化临床结果评估(coa)的限制,这些评估需要1)可靠地评估FOG的严重程度,2)对变化作出反应,3)捕捉患者相关影响。为了解决这些差距,国际FOG联盟(ICFOG)的工作组制定了一个临床评估结果——评估FOG严重程度的Giladi方案(GP-FOG),以及一个患者报告的结果——FOG生活质量问卷(FOG- qol)。fogg - coa项目将评估这些coa的概念框架和心理测量特性,以确定它们在临床试验中的适用性。来自7个国际中心的105个冷冻室和35个非冷冻室将在两次单独的访问(间隔7-14天)中完成多巴胺能关闭和打开状态的GP-FOG。来自视频记录的FOG注释将用于评估标准的有效性。两名训练有素的评分员在访问1时的OFF和ON GP-FOG评分,以及访问期间的评分内评分,将检验可靠性。反应性将通过比较关闭和打开GP-FOG评分之间的效应大小来评估。将通过患者感知的FOG严重程度与GP-FOG评分之间的关联来评估患者意义。参与者将在每次访问时完成FOG-QOL,以评估fogq和PDQ-8的重测信度和效度。一部分冷冻机将接受认知访谈,以确定相关的日常生活FOG影响并评估FOG- qol的意义。总的来说,这项工作将推进标准化、敏感和有意义的fogo - coa,支持监管级端点和多维结果框架的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Neuroscience
European Journal of Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
305
审稿时长
3.5 months
期刊介绍: EJN is the journal of FENS and supports the international neuroscientific community by publishing original high quality research articles and reviews in all fields of neuroscience. In addition, to engage with issues that are of interest to the science community, we also publish Editorials, Meetings Reports and Neuro-Opinions on topics that are of current interest in the fields of neuroscience research and training in science. We have recently established a series of ‘Profiles of Women in Neuroscience’. Our goal is to provide a vehicle for publications that further the understanding of the structure and function of the nervous system in both health and disease and to provide a vehicle to engage the neuroscience community. As the official journal of FENS, profits from the journal are re-invested in the neuroscientific community through the activities of FENS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书