Children's at Home: Pilot Study Assessing Dedicated Social Media for Parents of Adolescents with Neurofibromatosis Type 1.

The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate Children's at Home (C@H), a dedicated social media website for parents of adolescents with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). The interventional study included two phases: (1) creating video intervention/prevention assessment (VIA) visual narratives about having an adolescent with NF1 and (2) interacting on C@H, a secure, medically moderated social media website. C@H was evaluated qualitatively at three time points. At enrollment (T0, N = 17), participants reported needing C@H to break their isolation, connect with other families, and receive accurate information, advice, and support from others facing similar challenges. At T1, after creating VIA during 6 months (N = 13, 145 videos), participants mostly valued the opportunity to speak about the challenges they face with NF1 and their journey since diagnosis. At T2, after interacting on C@H for 7 weeks (N = 10, two sign-ins/week/parent), participants reported connecting with other parents of children with NF1 for the first time, valuing the "real faces" and emotions of other parents with shared experiences providing a sense of normalcy. Qualitative analysis suggested that C@H decreased feelings of isolation, provided relief to talk about NF1 without having to explain it, provided new knowledge about NF1 and the opportunity to address non-medical issues of NF1 never discussed in clinic, and helped participants with putting their lives into perspective. C@H allowed parents of adolescents with NF1 to overcome previous isolation and connect for the first time. Innovative applications of social media dedicated to those who care for children with chronic conditions can provide peer-to-peer support, shared experience, and reliable medical information

Revised diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 and Legius syndrome: an international consensus recommendation

Abstract Purpose By incorporating major developments in genetics, ophthalmology, dermatology, and neuroimaging, to revise the diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and to establish diagnostic criteria for Legius syndrome (LGSS). Methods We used a multistep process, beginning with a Delphi method involving global experts and subsequently involving non-NF experts, patients, and foundations/patient advocacy groups. Results We reached consensus on the minimal clinical and genetic criteria for diagnosing and differentiating NF1 and LGSS, which have phenotypic overlap in young patients with pigmentary findings. Criteria for the mosaic forms of these conditions are also recommended. Conclusion The revised criteria for NF1 incorporate new clinical features and genetic testing, whereas the criteria for LGSS were created to differentiate the two conditions. It is likely that continued refinement of these new criteria will be necessary as investigators (1) study the diagnostic properties of the revised criteria, (2) reconsider criteria not included in this process, and (3) identify new clinical and other features of these conditions. For this reason, we propose an initiative to update periodically the diagnostic criteria for NF1 and LGSS. </jats:sec

Revised diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 and Legius syndrome: an international consensus recommendation

Purpose By incorporating major developments in genetics, ophthalmology, dermatology, and neuroimaging, to revise the diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and to establish diagnostic criteria for Legius syndrome (LGSS). Methods We used a multistep process, beginning with a Delphi method involving global experts and subsequently involving non-NF experts, patients, and foundations/patient advocacy groups. Results We reached consensus on the minimal clinical and genetic criteria for diagnosing and differentiating NF1 and LGSS, which have phenotypic overlap in young patients with pigmentary findings. Criteria for the mosaic forms of these conditions are also recommended. Conclusion The revised criteria for NF1 incorporate new clinical features and genetic testing, whereas the criteria for LGSS were created to differentiate the two conditions. It is likely that continued refinement of these new criteria will be necessary as investigators (1) study the diagnostic properties of the revised criteria, (2) reconsider criteria not included in this process, and (3) identify new clinical and other features of these conditions. For this reason, we propose an initiative to update periodically the diagnostic criteria for NF1 and LGSS