Web-Based Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Well-being: Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness can improve overall well-being by training individuals to focus on the present moment without judging their thoughts. However, it is unknown how much mindfulness practice and training are necessary to improve well-being. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to determine whether a standard 8-session web-based mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) program, compared with a brief 3-session mindfulness intervention, improved overall participant well-being. In addition, we sought to explore whether the treatment effects differed based on the baseline characteristics of the participants (ie, moderators). METHODS: Participants were recruited from 17 patient-powered research networks, web-based communities of stakeholders interested in a common research area. Participants were randomized to either a standard 8-session MBCT or a brief 3-session mindfulness training intervention accessed on the web. The participants were followed for 12 weeks. The primary outcome of the study was well-being, as measured by the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index. We hypothesized that MBCT would be superior to a brief mindfulness training. RESULTS: We randomized 4411 participants, 3873 (87.80%) of whom were White and 3547 (80.41%) of female sex assigned at birth. The mean baseline World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index score was 50.3 (SD 20.7). The average self-reported well-being in each group increased over the intervention period (baseline to 8 weeks; model-based slope for the MBCT group: 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.93, and brief mindfulness group: 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.91) as well as the full study period (ie, intervention plus follow-up; baseline to 20 weeks; model-based slope for MBCT group: 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48; and brief mindfulness group: 0.33, 95% CI 0.26-0.40). Changes in self-reported well-being were not significantly different between MBCT and brief mindfulness during the intervention period (model-based difference in slopes: -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19; P=.80) or during the intervention period plus 12-week follow-up (-0.08, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.02; P=.10). During the intervention period, younger participants (P=.05) and participants who completed a higher percentage of intervention sessions (P=.005) experienced greater improvements in well-being across both interventions, with effects that were stronger for participants in the MBCT condition. Attrition was high (ie, 2142/4411, 48.56%), which is an important limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS: Standard MBCT improved well-being but was not superior to a brief mindfulness intervention. This finding suggests that shorter mindfulness programs could yield important benefits across the general population of individuals with various medical conditions. Younger people and participants who completed more intervention sessions reported greater improvements in well-being, an effect that was more pronounced for participants in the MBCT condition. This finding suggests that standard MBCT may be a better choice for younger people as well as treatment-adherent individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03844321; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03844321.

Phelan-McDermid syndrome data network: Integrating patient reported outcomes with clinical notes and curated genetic reports.

The heterogeneity of patient phenotype data are an impediment to the research into the origins and progression of neuropsychiatric disorders. This difficulty is compounded in the case of rare disorders such as Phelan-McDermid Syndrome (PMS) by the paucity of patient clinical data. PMS is a rare syndromic genetic cause of autism and intellectual deficiency. In this paper, we describe the Phelan-McDermid Syndrome Data Network (PMS_DN), a platform that facilitates research into phenotype-genotype correlation and progression of PMS by: a) integrating knowledge of patient phenotypes extracted from Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) data and clinical notes-two heterogeneous, underutilized sources of knowledge about patient phenotypes-with curated genetic information from the same patient cohort and b) making this integrated knowledge, along with a suite of statistical tools, available free of charge to authorized investigators on a Web portal https://pmsdn.hms.harvard.edu. PMS_DN is a Patient Centric Outcomes Research Initiative (PCORI) where patients and their families are involved in all aspects of the management of patient data in driving research into PMS. To foster collaborative research, PMS_DN also makes patient aggregates from this knowledge available to authorized investigators using distributed research networks such as the PCORnet PopMedNet. PMS_DN is hosted on a scalable cloud based environment and complies with all patient data privacy regulations. As of October 31, 2016, PMS_DN integrates high-quality knowledge extracted from the clinical notes of 112 patients and curated genetic reports of 176 patients with preprocessed PRO data from 415 patients.

Emerging roles and opportunities for rare disease patient advocacy groups.

Background: Patient advocacy groups (PAGs) serve a vital role for rare disease patients and families by providing educational resources, support, and a sense of community. Motivated by patient need, PAGs are increasingly at the forefront of policy, research, and drug development for their disease of interest. Objectives: The study explored the current landscape of PAGs in order to guide new and existing PAGs on available resources and challenges to research engagement. We aim to inform industry, advocates, and healthcare personnel about PAG achievements and ways they are increasingly involved in research. Design: We chose PAGs from the Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network (RDCRN) Coalition for Patient Advocacy Groups (CPAG) listserv and the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD) 'Find a patient organization'. Methods: We surveyed eligible PAG leaders about the demographics, goals, and research activities of their organization. For analysis, PAGs were bucketed by size, age, prevalence of disease, and budget. Data were de-identified for cross-tabulation and multinomial logistic regression analysis with R. Results: Research engagement was an extremely important goal for most PAGs (81%), though ultra-rare disease and high-budget PAGs were most likely to cite it as the top priority. In total, 79% reported research engagement in some capacity, including registries, translational research, and clinical trials. 'Ultra-rare' PAGs were less likely than 'rare' PAGs to have an ongoing clinical trial. Conclusion: While PAGs of varying sizes, budgets, and maturity levels reported an interest in research, limited funding and lack of disease awareness continue to create barriers to achieving their goals. While support tools exist to make research more accessible, often their utility depends on the funding, sustainability, maturity of the PAG itself, and the level of investment of collaborators. Despite the availability of current support systems, there are challenges related to both the start-up and sustainability of patient-centric research efforts.