TY - JOUR A1 - Hebestreit, Helge A1 - Zeidler, Cornelia A1 - Schippers, Christopher A1 - de Zwaan, Martina A1 - Deckert, Jürgen A1 - Heuschmann, Peter A1 - Krauth, Christian A1 - Bullinger, Monika A1 - Berger, Alexandra A1 - Berneburg, Mark A1 - Brandstetter, Lilly A1 - Deibele, Anna A1 - Dieris-Hirche, Jan A1 - Graessner, Holm A1 - Gündel, Harald A1 - Herpertz, Stephan A1 - Heuft, Gereon A1 - Lapstich, Anne-Marie A1 - Lücke, Thomas A1 - Maisch, Tim A1 - Mundlos, Christine A1 - Petermann-Meyer, Andrea A1 - Müller, Susanne A1 - Ott, Stephan A1 - Pfister, Lisa A1 - Quitmann, Julia A1 - Romanos, Marcel A1 - Rutsch, Frank A1 - Schaubert, Kristina A1 - Schubert, Katharina A1 - Schulz, Jörg B. A1 - Schweiger, Susann A1 - Tüscher, Oliver A1 - Ungethüm, Kathrin A1 - Wagner, Thomas O. F. A1 - Haas, Kirsten T1 - Dual guidance structure for evaluation of patients with unclear diagnosis in centers for rare diseases (ZSE-DUO): study protocol for a controlled multi-center cohort study JF - Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases N2 - Background In individuals suffering from a rare disease the diagnostic process and the confirmation of a final diagnosis often extends over many years. Factors contributing to delayed diagnosis include health care professionals' limited knowledge of rare diseases and frequent (co-)occurrence of mental disorders that may complicate and delay the diagnostic process. The ZSE-DUO study aims to assess the benefits of a combination of a physician focusing on somatic aspects with a mental health expert working side by side as a tandem in the diagnostic process. Study design This multi-center, prospective controlled study has a two-phase cohort design. Methods Two cohorts of 682 patients each are sequentially recruited from 11 university-based German Centers for Rare Diseases (CRD): the standard care cohort (control, somatic expertise only) and the innovative care cohort (experimental, combined somatic and mental health expertise). Individuals aged 12 years and older presenting with symptoms and signs which are not explained by current diagnoses will be included. Data will be collected prior to the first visit to the CRD’s outpatient clinic (T0), at the first visit (T1) and 12 months thereafter (T2). Outcomes Primary outcome is the percentage of patients with one or more confirmed diagnoses covering the symptomatic spectrum presented. Sample size is calculated to detect a 10 percent increase from 30% in standard care to 40% in the innovative dual expert cohort. Secondary outcomes are (a) time to diagnosis/diagnoses explaining the symptomatology; (b) proportion of patients successfully referred from CRD to standard care; (c) costs of diagnosis including incremental cost effectiveness ratios; (d) predictive value of screening instruments administered at T0 to identify patients with mental disorders; (e) patients’ quality of life and evaluation of care; and f) physicians’ satisfaction with the innovative care approach. Conclusions This is the first multi-center study to investigate the effects of a mental health specialist working in tandem with a somatic expert physician in CRDs. If this innovative approach proves successful, it will be made available on a larger scale nationally and promoted internationally. In the best case, ZSE-DUO can significantly shorten the time to diagnosis for a suspected rare disease. KW - rare diseases KW - multi‑center cohort study KW - dual guidance Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-300440 VL - 17 IS - 1 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Neszmélyi, Bence A1 - Weller, Lisa A1 - Kunde, Wilfried A1 - Pfister, Roland T1 - Social action effects: representing predicted partner responses in social interactions JF - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience N2 - The sociomotor framework outlines a possible role of social action effects on human action control, suggesting that anticipated partner reactions are a major cue to represent, select, and initiate own body movements. Here, we review studies that elucidate the actual content of social action representations and that explore factors that can distinguish action control processes involving social and inanimate action effects. Specifically, we address two hypotheses on how the social context can influence effect-based action control: first, by providing unique social features such as body-related, anatomical codes, and second, by orienting attention towards any relevant feature dimensions of the action effects. The reviewed empirical work presents a surprisingly mixed picture: while there is indirect evidence for both accounts, previous studies that directly addressed the anatomical account showed no signs of the involvement of genuinely social features in sociomotor action control. Furthermore, several studies show evidence against the differentiation of social and non-social action effect processing, portraying sociomotor action representations as remarkably non-social. A focus on enhancing the social experience in future studies should, therefore, complement the current database to establish whether such settings give rise to the hypothesized influence of social context. KW - motor control KW - action effects KW - action representation KW - sociomotor control KW - ideomotor theory Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-276609 SN - 1662-5161 VL - 16 ER -