Impact of text difficulty and visual emphasis on pediatric neuropsychological evaluation reports: The parent's perspective.

Objective: Despite varying opinions, little research has examined how to best write pediatric neuropsychology reports. Method: This study gathered input from 230 parents on how text difficulty (reading level) and visual emphasis (bullets, underline, italics) affect report readability and utility. We focused on the most-read report section: summary/impressions. Each parent rated the readability and usefulness of a generic summary/impressions section written in four different styles. The four styles crossed text difficulty (high school-vs-collegiate) with use of visual emphasis (absent-vs-present). Results: Parents found versions with easier text to be more clearly written, easier to follow, and easier to find information (p<.001). Parents rated those with harder text to be overly detailed, complex, hard to understand, and hard to read (p<.001). Visual emphasis made it easier to find key information and the text easier to follow and understand - but primarily for versions that were written in difficult text (interaction p≤.026). After rating all four styles, parents picked their preference. They most often picked versions written in easier text with visual emphasis (p<.001). Conclusions: Findings support writing styles that use easier text difficulty and visual emphasis.

Stiffness post-total knee replacement: A proof of principle study investigating the effect of gene expression analysis of markers of fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: To establish proof of principle of a link between phenotypic expression and stiffness after TKR. METHODS: From 100 patients, genetic expression of markers of fibrosis was performed for 15 synovial samples from patients categorised as 'best post-operative range of movement (ROM)' and 15 samples from patients with 'worst ROM'. These markers included Matrix Metalloproteinases (MMPs), A Disintegrin and Metalloproteinases with Thrombospondin (ADAMTS) and Tissue Inhibitors of Matrix Metalloproteinases (TIMPs). Genetic marker data were compared to Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) and Pain Catastrophizing Scores (PCS). RESULTS: Quantitative markers for gene expression demonstrated more outliers in stiff compared to non-stiff knees, suggesting a greater imbalance in pro- and anti-fibrotic markers in stiff knees. Whilst there was a significant difference in the range of post-operative knee flexion (p = 0.001) and extension (p = 0.001), there was no statistically significant difference between stiff and non-stiff knees in pre-operative or post-operative OKS (p ≥ 0.06). There was no difference in the individual components of the individual PCS score items nor the PCS total scores when stiff and non-stiff knees were compared (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Biological factors, namely gene expression of MMPs, TIMPs and ADAMTS, may contribute towards post-TKR stiffness. This now warrants further investigation to better understand this relationship based on larger, multi-centre, cohorts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.

Evolution of parental knowledge and efficacy across the pediatric neuropsychological evaluation process.

OBJECTIVE: The handful of studies examining parent satisfaction after pediatric neuropsychological evaluations have focused on post-evaluation appraisals. By examining parent experiences across the course of their child's evaluation, this study aimed to provide important insights into how and when parents experience changes in knowledge, understanding of care options, and efficacy during evaluation process. METHOD: Parents of youth receiving neuropsychological evaluation completed questionnaires at four time points (prior to evaluation [n = 363], day of testing [n = 300], prior to feedback [n = 250], and post-report [n = 99]). Parents rated aspects of their knowledge and efficacy regarding their child's functioning. Parents also rated their perception of the neuropsychologist, medical provider, and school along the same domains. The resulting longitudinal data were analyzed using structural equation modeling and ANCOVA. Although primary analyses focused on the entire sample, differences between first-time evaluations and re-evaluations were also examined. RESULTS: Families receiving an initial evaluation showed lower ratings in knowledge, awareness of options, and efficacy at the beginning of the evaluation and a significant increase in ratings by the end of the evaluation. Families returning for re-evaluation showed higher initial ratings that changed comparatively little during the evaluation. Parents receiving initial evaluations also perceived increased knowledge of their child by medical providers and school. CONCLUSION: The study supports the clinical assumption that parents gain knowledge about their child and treatment options during a neuropsychological evaluation. The difference between initial and re-evaluation warrants further study. Studying the process and experience of neuropsychological evaluation may provide more nuanced findings than post hoc satisfaction measures.