Clinical Outcome Assessment Instruments in Schizophrenia: A Scoping Literature Review with a Focus on the Potential of Patient-reported Outcomes.

Objective: The complexity inherent in the treatment of schizophrenia results in a multitude of outcome assessments being employed when conducting clinical trials. Subjective outcome assessments and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) to evaluate clinical meaningfulness have gained traction; however, the extent of application in evaluation of treatments for schizophrenia is unknown. A scoping review was conducted to assess the availability of published psychometric evaluations, including MCIDs, for clinical outcome assessments used to evaluate treatments for schizophrenia. Method of Research: Key databases (PubMed®, Embase®, APA PsycINFO®, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research) were searched for studies on schizophrenia published from 2010 to 2020. Secondary sources (ClinicalTrials.gov, PROLABELS™, FDA.gov) were also reviewed. Clinical outcome assessments were organized by type (patient-reported outcomes [PROs], clinician-reported outcomes [ClinROs], observer-reported outcomes [ObsROs]) and further classified by intended use (generic, mental health, schizophrenia). Reliability and internal consistency were evaluated using Cronbach's α. External validity was evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Across 140 studies, 66 clinical outcome assessments were identified. MCIDs were reported for eight of the 66 studies. Of these, two were PROs (generic) and six were ClinROs/ObsROs (three mental health-specific, three schizophrenia-specific). Reliability was good across generic, mental health-specific, and schizophrenia-specific categories, whereas external validity was strong mainly for schizophrenia-specific PROs. Overall, ClinROs/ObsROs that focused on mental health had good reliability and strong external validity. Conclusion: This review provides a comprehensive overview of the clinical outcome assessments used in schizophrenia research during the past ten years. Results highlight the heterogeneity of existing outcomes and a growing interest in PROs for schizophrenia.

Clinical Validation of the Autism Behavior Inventory: Caregiver-Rated Assessment of Core and Associated Symptoms of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

There is a need for measures to track symptom change in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We conducted a validation study on a revised version of the Autism Behavior Inventory (ABI), and a short form (ABI-S). Caregivers of individuals (6-54 years) with confirmed diagnoses of ASD (N = 144) completed the ABI and other rating scales at 4 time points. Scale consistency for each domain, 3-5 day test-retest reliability, and construct validity, determined by comparison to pre-specified scales, were all good. Change in the ABI was congruent with changes in other instruments. Collectively, results suggest incipient suitability of the ABI as a measure of changes in core and associated symptoms of ASD.Trial Registration NCT02299700.

Reliability of the Alzheimer's disease assessment scale (ADAS-Cog) in longitudinal studies.

BACKGROUND: Considering the scarcity of longitudinal assessments of reliability, there is need for a more precise understanding of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The primary goal was to assess longitudinal changes in inter-rater reliability, test retest reliability and internal consistency of scores of the ADAS-Cog. METHODS: 2,618 AD subjects were enrolled in seven randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter-trials from 1986 to 2009. Reliability, internal-consistency and cross-sectional analysis of ADAS-Cog and MMSE across seven visits were examined. RESULTS: Intra-class correlation (ICC) for ADAS-Cog was moderate to high supporting their reliability. Absolute Agreement ICCs 0.392 (Visit-7) to 0.806 (Visit-2) showed a progressive decrease in correlations across time. Item analysis revealed a decrease in item correlations, with the lowest correlations for Visit 7 for Commands (ICC=0.148), Comprehension (ICC=0.092), Spoken Language (ICC=0.044). DISCUSSION: Suitable assessment of AD treatments is maintained through accurate measurement of clinically significant outcomes. Targeted rater education ADAS-Cog items over-time can improve ability to administer and score the scale.