Order this paper

Grant Proposal – Peer Reviews

By Day 1 of Week Five, the instructor will send you two de-identified grant proposals to review for this assignment . You will play the role of a grant reviewer by reading and giving feedback to two other students’ grant proposals (proposals will be assigned at random).

The Grant Proposal – Peer Reviews
Must be three to six double-spaced pages in length (not including the title or reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
Must address the following areas of the proposal you are reviewing:
Specific Aims: Does the proposed study seem adequate to achieve these specific aims?
Background: Does the literature review justify the need for the study? Are there any gaps or missing data in the literature review?
Significance: Does the proposed study improve scientific knowledge, technical capability and/or clinical practice?
Proposed Study: Does the proposed study methodology answer the hypotheses listed in the Background section? Is the proposed methodology sufficient to achieve the stated specific aims?
Must include a separate title page with the following:
Title of paper you are reviewing
Reviewer’s name
Course name and number
Instructor’s name
Date submitted
Must use at least one peer-reviewed source in addition to the course text.
Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
Must include a separate reference page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.

Preferred Method of Communication in Angelman Syndrome
Student F
PSY625: Biological Bases of Behavior
Dr. King
April 18, 2016

?
Preferred Method of Communication in Angelman Syndrome

Specific Aims
Angelman Syndrome (AS) is known for many different symptoms. These include such symptoms as developmental delay, absent speech, ataxic gait, seizures, and a distinctive behavioral phenotype with excitability and paroxysms of laughter (Dagli, Buiting, & Williams, 2012). Angelman Syndrome was first observed in 1965 by a man named Harry Angelman (Braun, 2013) and it is caused by a mutation on the fifteenth chromosome. Angelman Syndrome was originally called the happy puppet syndrome due to the children diagnosed with it were smiling most of the time (Squalene, 2015).
Communication can be difficult when a person with AS does not have the ability to speak. Other forms of communication are needed. There are different types of programs to teach children communication as there can be communicative and cognitive difficulties in children with AS. One of these programs is called the Hanen Program ‘More than Words’ (deCarlos Isla, & Baixauli Fortea, 2016). Communication Mode Sampling is another way of discovering which mode of communication works best for a child with AS (Martin, Reichle, Dimiam, Schuele, & Binger, 2013).
The specific aim of this proposal is to assess the different communicative programs that are available for children with AS and how they compare to children who are not involved in a communicative program. There has been some research in this area and more research would be beneficial in finding the correct program to help those with AS communicate to the best of their ability. In a research that was done with parents (Radstaake, Didden, Peters-Scheffer, Sigafoos, Korzilius, & Curfs, 2014), parents were able to fill out questionnaires regarding the levels of the disabilities their children faced and in which areas. This would be helpful combined with the results of a future study to provide children with the best program to fit their specific needs.

Background

There has not been a lot of research done regarding Angelman syndrome and the effects it has on communication. Angelman syndrome was first observed by Harry Angelman and affects one in fifteen thousand live births (Braun, 2013). Along with communication disability there are other disabilities that go along with Angelman syndrome such as developmental delays, ataxic gait, and seizures. Children with AS seem to always be smiling or smiling most of the time. Although most children with AS never speak verbally, they do have ways of communicating such as pointing, grabbing, reaching, pushing or even just looking at what they want (deCarlos & Baixauli, 2016).
The reason for AS is an abnormality in the UBE3A gene (Braun, 2013) and this is diagnosed by doing a blood test. The blood test is to see if there is abnormalities on the fifteenth chromosome (Squillante, 2013). Along with the possibility of abnormalities on the fifteenth chromosome, the fifteenth chromosome could also be missing entirely. There is no cure for AS so when a child is born with it there is the understanding that child will always need to be taken care of. Usually it is difficult to diagnose AS until the child reaches the age where they would be starting to talk, walk etc. It can be difficult to know what a child or adult needs when they are unable to voice their opinion about such things.
Communication can be a big issue for children with AS. Children with AS who cannot speak use different forms of communication. However it has been said that children with AS love to communicate and be around people (Calculator, 2014) There are different alternatives programs available for children with AS.
There is a self-administered test that parents give themselves regarding the effectiveness and patterns of the use of augmentative and alternative communication systems. This test helps to gather information from parents regarding the communication methods their children currently used (Calculator, 2014). According to this article children with AS love to be sociable with others. This would be one reason that it is so important to provide children with AS the opportunity to learn all they can in the way of communicating. In the self- administered tests there were rating scales and closed tests that helped in gathering the information and learning all they could about the individual child and where they stood in their communication. When the results were completed it found that non-symbolic methods were very important to individuals with AS. Electronic devices also were however the devices were to a lesser extent.
In another study 25 children were given a medicine called Minocycline (Greico, Ciarlone, Gieron-Korthals, Schoenberg, Smith, Philpot & Webster, 2014). After given the children who consisted of the ages of 4-12, this medicine for 8 weeks there showed an improvement. Although there was significant improvement in the mean raw scores of the BSID-III subdomains communication and fine motor ability along with subdomains auditory comprehension and total language, the effects of long term usage has not been tested. It is not known what the effects would be for long term use as further testing would be required for this.
Communication Modality Sampling is sometimes used to help with discovering which modes of communication works for a child. As was the case in Martin, Reichle, Dimiam, Schuele, & Binger (2013). A toddler with AS was introduced to vocal, gestural, and graphic communication modes. These modes were implemented concurrently and used to identify what would be the most efficient form of communication for this particular child. In this particular study graphic mode was preferred for the child after being introduced to graphic and gestural modes. The child responded using the graphic mode.
The Enhanced Natural Gestures program (ENG) is another program parents self-administered (Calculator 2016). Although children with AS normally use natural gestures, these gestures can vary from child to child so it can be sometimes difficult to understand what the child is trying to say through gestures. In this specific article, parents used two different types of teaching methods to their children which consisted of Mand-Model with time delay and Molding-shaping into the everyday interactions with their children (Calculator, 2016). Although this type of study had been done by the people that introduced the study before, it was done in a classroom setting previously. This program was well received by the parents. They found that the program exceeded their expectations and was regarded positively across multiple dimensions (Calculator, 2016).
There are many different forms of communication used with a person with AS and research has been done either in the classroom or at home to discover which type of communication works for the individual child.

Significance
With Angelman syndrome, children always have a smile on their face and they usually really love to be sociable with others. It is important for any child to be able to communicate with others. When a child cannot speak such as a child with AS other steps must be taken so that child can communicate with others. There are different ways of communicating and different programs available for children with AS. There are also some children who have never been exposed to these programs. It is vital to make sure parents are aware of the programs available for their children. It is just as important that the parent find out which type of program is the best for their child. With this in mind, this research revolves around providing parents with a questionnaire that can be completed in two parts. The first part being how the children communicate with the resources they have available now and then the second part of the survey completed after the study is completed. During the study the parents will be administering three different programs in a ten month program completed at home. During this time the information will be documented on how the child does with each and whether they have used this program before or if it is new to them. The performance data will be collected containing cognitive, communication and behavioral.
Proposed Study
Participants:
This study will consist of thirty children ranging in age from 4– 12 who have Angelman syndrome. These children will be from randomly selected from the New York City Area. These participants will be selected after a questionnaire is completed by the parents of potential participants with AS. From these questionnaires is where the participants will be chosen from. This questionnaire will ask questions regarding the difference which type of communication the child with AS uses the most. Ten of the children will be chosen based on having never used any programs to learn to communicate. Ten will be chosen on having used the Hanen Program (deCarlos Isla, & Baixauli Fortea, 2016) and those who have used the Enhanced Natural Gestures Program (Calculator 2016).
Procedures:
Once the candidates are chosen they will meet at a local school and will be briefed regarding the process of the research. The parents will have a training session at the beginning of each program that their child will be starting. Upon completion of each program there will be another session where parents will go over which areas of the program worked better than others for their child. They will then be briefed on the next program their child will start. The parents will be supplied a computer where they will be able to record the activity and progress of their child. Upon completion of the program the parents will be allowed to keep the computer along with receiving $50.00 a month for each month they stay in the research. They will also have the option of opting out of the program in which case they will forfeit the computer and the payments for the additional months they did not complete the program. This will be a three month research in which each month the program the child is in will change until they have completed all three programs. Parents will keep track of their child’s progress and how they reacted to each program. The purpose of this program is to determine which form of communication is the best for each individual child with Angelman Syndrome. Children with AS love to be sociable (Calculator, 2014). It is due to this that it is the utmost of importance that each child with AS is able to communicate to the best of their ability. At the end of the three months the program that has worked best for the child will be the one that is implemented into their care plan. As it is important to show those funding the program the outcome of the research (Flavin, 2014), a complete account of the results will be sent to the funding committee upon completion of the research.
Hypotheses & Analysis:
This group of children with AS are expected to be able to communicate with the program that works best for them upon completion of this research. The children will have the opportunity to learn different ways of communication through the help of their parents as they implement the programs to their children. As children normally use gestures that can be difficult for those taking care of to understand, it is important to teach the children with AS a program that both the parents and the children understand to more successfully teach and communicate with the child.
Budget Justification

Funding is requested for a professor and a part time research assistant. These two people will be responsible for selecting the participants, providing training, collecting research and calculating the results. Requested funding is at 10% for the professor overseeing the research and at 30% for the Research assistant who is doing the leg work of getting the participants, collecting the data and analyzing the results.
In order for the information to be collected properly, all participants will be provided the same type of computer with the programs installed to make it easier to learn the new programs and introduce them to their children. The information will be added to the programs on the computer as it is available and sent into the research assistant so analyzing can be started.
The professor and RA will be attending each monthly session that is held for the progress reports and for the new information to be released to the groups as they will be starting a new program.
Each participant will receive $50.00 a month as payment for participation in each section of the research. These participants will be allowed to keep the computers after the research as it will help in the teaching process they will implement into their children’s learning.
There are miscellaneous supplies and a main computer that will need to be purchased also to keep track of all the data collected.
The Appendix section has a detailed budget for this research.
I ask that you consider this grant as it will help in the communication process for those with Angelman Syndrome. Thank you for your time.
References

Braun, E. (2013). ORGANIZATION SPOTLIGHT. An In-Box Full of Inspiration: Angelman
Syndrome Foundation. Exceptional Parent, 43(5), 18-20 3p.

Calculator, S. N. (2013). Parents’ Reports of Patterns of Use and Exposure to Practices
Associated with AAC Acceptance by Individuals with Angelman Syndrome. AAC:
Augmentative & Alternative Communication, 29(2), 146-158 13p.
doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.784804

Calculator, S. N. (2014). Parents’ Perceptions of Communication Patterns and Effectiveness of Use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication Systems by Their Children with Angelman Syndrome. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 23(4), 562-573 12p. doi:10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0140
Calculator, S., & Diaz-Caneja Sela, P. (2015). Overview of the Enhanced Natural Gestures
Instructional Approach and Illustration of Its Use with Three Students with Angelman
Syndrome. Journal Of Applied Research In Intellectual Disabilities, 28(2), 145-158.
doi:10.1111/jar.12110

Calculator, S. N. (2016). Description and Evaluation of a Home-Based, Parent-Administered
Program for Teaching Enhanced Natural Gestures to Individuals with Angelman
Syndrome. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 25(1), 1-13 13p.
doi:10.1044/2015AJSLP-15-0017

Carlson, N. R. (2013). Physiology of behavior (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Dagli, A., Buiting, K., & Williams, C. A. (2012). Molecular and Clinical Aspects of Angelman
Syndrome. Molecular Syndromology, 2(3-5), 100–112. http://doi.org/10.1159/000328837

de Carlos Isla, M., & Baixauli Fortea, I. (2016). Parent-implemented Hanen program ‘More than
words’ in Angelman syndrome: A case study. Child Language Teaching &
Therapy, 32(1), 35-51 17p. doi:10.1177/0265659014567784
Flavin, R. (2014). Tips for Writing a Winning Grant Proposal. (cover story). Tech
Directions, 74(1), 18-19.
Grieco, J. C., Ciarlone, S. L., Gieron-Korthals, M., Schoenberg, M. R., Smith, A. G., Philpot, R.
M., & … Weeber, E. J. (2014). An open-label pilot trial of minocycline in children as a
treatment for Angelman syndrome. BMC Neurology, 14(1), 42-59. doi:10.1186/s12883-
014-0232-x

Martin, J. H., Reichle, J., Dimian, A., Mo, C., Schuele, C. M., & Binger, C. (2013).
Communication Modality Sampling for a Toddler with Angelman Syndrome. Language,
Speech & Hearing Services In Schools, 44(4), 327-336 10p. doi:0161-1461(2013/12-
0108)

Mayo clinic (1998-2016), Angelman Syndrome, Treatments and drugs. Retrieved from:
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/angelman- syndrome/basics/treatment/con-20033404

Radstaake, M., Didden, R., Lang, R., O’Reilly, M., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G., & … Curfs, L.
(2013). Functional Analysis and Functional Communication Training in the Classroom
for Three Children with Angelman Syndrome. Journal Of Developmental & Physical
Disabilities, 25(1), 49-63. doi:10.1007/s10882-012-9302-4

Radstaake, M., Didden, R., Peters-Scheffer, N., Sigafoos, J., Korzilius, H., & Curfs, L. (2014).
Educational Priorities for Individuals with Angelman Syndrome: A Study of Parents’
Perspectives. Journal of Developmental & Physical Disabilities, 26(3), 299-316.
doi:10.1007/s10882-013-9365-x

Squillante, L. (2015). My Sister, an Angel. Human Life Review, 41(3), 45.

?

Appendix A: Budget

SUMMARY PROPOSAL BUDGET
FOR INSTITUTION USE ONLY
ORGANIZATION
Angelman Syndrome Organization. PROPOSAL NO. DURATION (MONTHS)
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR (PI)/PROJECT DIRECTOR
Professor Kimble AWARD NO.
A. PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PIs, Faculty, Graduate Assistants, etc. Funds
List each separately with name and title. Requested By
Proposer
1. Professor Kimble, ($85,000.00/Year) 10% effort 4 $2,833.00
2. Research Assistant (70,000.00/year) 30% effort for 4 months $7000.00
TOTAL SALARIES $9833.00
B. EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000.)

30 Laptops @ $239.00 each
TOTAL EQUIPMENT $7.130.00
C. TRAVEL 1. DOMESTIC – Professor attending monthly meeting x3 @ $1200.00 each) $3600.00
2. OTHER – RA Attending monthly meeting x3@ $1,000.00 each $3,000.0
TOTALTRAVEL $6,600.00
D. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT $4,500
1. STIPENDS $ $150.00 x 30
2. TRAVEL
3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER

TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS (30) TOTAL PARTICIPANT COSTS $4,500.00
E. OTHER DIRECT COSTS: data collection and analysis/Computer $2,700.00
1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES- training materials and videos $500.00
2. OTHER –
3 OTHER Office supplies $325.00
4. OTHER

TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $
F. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH E) $31,588.00
G. TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS (F&A) (Rate = 37.5%) $11846.00
H. Total Direct and Indirect costs (F + G
H. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (F + G) $43,434.00

The Effective of a Variety of Questionnaires to Determine How Often

Patients are Experiencing the Key Symptoms of Parkinson’s Disease

Student G

PSY 625: Biological Bases of Behavior

Dr. Thomas Jones

April 18, 2016

?
The Effective of a Variety of Questionnaires to Determine How Often Patients are Experiencing

the Key Symptoms of Parkinson’s Disease

Specific Aims

Advances in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease have led to significant improvement in many of the disabling motor symptoms of the disease, but this often comes at the cost of neuropsychiatric side-effects that the patients must suffer. Probably the first significant neuropsychiatric side-effect of treatment that was identified was psychosis. Psychotic symptoms are often common in drug treated patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD). Psychotic symptoms develop in 20-40% of patients with PD who receive long-term anti-PD medications, with visual hallucinations and paranoid delusions being the most frequent. (Aarons et al., 2012). Hallucinations, which are defined as sensory perceptions with external stimulation of the relevant sensory organ, are a common feature that is associated with Parkinson’s disease (Wood, et al., 2015). Various types of hallucinations have been described in PD, including formed visual hallucinations (VH), auditory hallucinations, and extracampine hallucinations (EH) (Wood, et al., 2015). Of these three, VH are the most commonly described with the lifetime prevalence in PD patients of 75% (Wood, et al., 2015).
The specific aim of this proposal is to assess the effectiveness of a variety of questionnaires to determine how often patients are experiencing EH and the characteristics of EH plus other key symptoms of Parkinson’s disease, specifically visual hallucinations and cognitive impairment. Recent research has shown that VHs affect a far larger proportion of PD patients than has been noted in cross-sectional studies (Gibson, et al, 2012).

Background

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a chronic, progressive neurological disorder that causes severe disability and distress. Until recently, PD has become more accurately seen as a neurobehavioral disorder due to behavioral problems, such as depression and dementia, which are hereditary to the disease; and others such as impulse control disorders and psychotic symptoms, which could be more related to treatment (Friedman, 2013). Psychotic symptoms can be highly disabling and have as much of an impact on activities of daily living, quality of life and caregiver burden as the motor symptoms; but in order to get assist for them they require early education and identification (Aarons, et al., 2012). The clinical spectrum of psychosis in PD can vary from hallucinations, paranoid delusions to delirium (Benbir, et al., 2006).
The administration of dopamineragic drugs was previously believed to be the main cause of psychosis and hallucinations; although recent studies show that sleep disturbance, longer duration and advanced stage of the disease can also be risk factors for the occurrence of psychotic symptoms in PD patients (Moustafa, et al., 2014). Hallucinations, like other non-motor features of PD, have not been well recognized in routine clinical practice, either in primary or in secondary care, and are frequently missed during consultations (Papaetropoulos, et al., 2008). Many of the PD rating scales that are used have low sensitivity to detect hallucinations and other psychotic symptoms, only assess hallucinations on a few sub-items, or are not easy to administer in busy clinical settings.
Visual images are the most common subtype of hallucination reported in PD; although other hallucinatory experiences can also occur. “Although the hallucinations are mainly visual and may be people, animals, insects, or inanimate objects; they may also be auditory, tactile or cenesthetic” (Wada-Isoe, et al., 2007). A significant portion of PD patients do report their hallucination experiences as being a single sensory modality, while approximately 30% of patients have multi-modal hallucinations (Katzen, et al., 2010). The majority of these patients describe primary visual hallucinations accompanied by experiences within a second modality which may include auditory, olfactory, or gustatory phenomenon. Many study have been completed on visual hallucinations in PD; however the evidence for risk factors associated with VHs in PD varies considerably (Gibson, et al., 2012). VH in PD are associated with the occurrence of cognitive dysfunction, daytime somnolence, and sleep disorders (Wood, et al., 2015). “Although their neural basis is not yet fully established, structural and functional neuroimaging studies have implicated a variety of brain systems, including anterior visual pathways, brainstem, and visual association regions in their pathogenesis” (Wood, et al., 2015). In addition, antiparkisonian drug therapy has also been reported to cause psychosis and has been linked to VH in PD; but this is not sufficient evidence to explain the occurrence of all VH in PD. The drug-induced psychosis in PD may continue even when the medication is taken way and there appears to be a poor correlation between drug exposure and symptom severity.
Significance
The proposed research will administer a variety of questionnaires to patients with PD who experience different types of hallucinations. Since many of the current questionnaires are not specific enough to assess hallucinations or because they are not easy enough to administer in busy clinical settings, many of the non-motor feathers of PD are outlooked by physicians in routine clinical practice. If using a variety of questionnaires, instead of just one or two with patients who experience a variety of hallucinations are shown to have benefits, many more

people can gain from these benefits. For research study program each participant will take a variety of questionnaires and rating scales that allow for comprehensive assessment of hallucinations in clinical or research settings. For our study PD patients of all ages and in all stages of the disease were recruited over a 12-month period. A battery of tests were given to each participant and were used for comparisons. All participants were given a stipend of $100.00 for their participation.
Proposed Study
Participants:
40 Parkinson’s disease patients will be recruited for this study. The PD patients will be of all ages and in all stages of the disease and will be recruited over a 12-month period. All subjects will be recruited from the Parkinson’s & Movement Disorders University of Virginia Neurosciences Center.
All participants must live within 2 hours of the UVA Neurosciences Center where the study will take place. All participants will take a neuropsychological battery of tests that assess their hallucinations and other key characteristics of PD. The assessments that will be given are scales such as the Unified Parkinson’s disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) part I and II, the Parkinson’s Psychosis Scale (PPRS), the Parkinson’s Disease-Psychosocial questionnaire (SCOPA-PS), The University of Miami Parkinson’s Disease Hallucinations Questionnaire (UM-PDHQ). There are no major risks to patients who participate in the research. Patients may elect to stop participating in the study at any time. Each participant that concludes the research will receive $100.00 for their participation.

Procedures:
Once a participant has been identified for enrollment into the study, they will be sent information in the mail of where to meet initially and when the study will begin. On the first day of the study, patients will all meet at the UVA Neurosciences Center and will have training protocol described and provide informed consent if they wish to enroll. Once the participant has enrolled, each participant will be assigned to a graduate assistant who will work with them through their testing. Baseline data will be taken at the initial assessment and follow-up assessment will be taken at 12, 24, and 36 months by trained researchers. At each interview, each of the four assessments will be conducted, as well as cognition using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the PD Questionnaire eight item version (PDQ-8) to determine associations with the patient’s Quality of Life.
The four assessments that will be conducted are all short questionnaires. The patients will be assessed over two short testing periods and will be given breaks, if necessary. The Unified Parkinson’s disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) part I and II is a 17 item questionnaire with a 4-point Likert scale, the Parkinson’s Psychosis Rating Scale (PPRS), is s short 6 questionnaire with a 4-point Likert scale the Parkinson’s Disease-Psychosocial questionnaire (SCOPA-PS) is an 11 point questionnaire with a 4-point Likert scale, and The University of Miami Parkinson’s Disease Hallucinations Questionnaire (UM-PDHQ) is a 20 item questionnaire that is composed of 6 quantitative and 14 qualitative items.
Hypotheses & Analysis:
It is expected that patients with hallucinations will exhibit greater cognitive deficits than patients without a history of hallucinations. Although in prior studies, which have focus mostly on visual hallucinations, the results have been mixed, showing cognitive changes including specific domains such as memory, executive, and visuospatial skills. This may be due differences in testing and medication usage. We also expected patients with visual hallucinations to have difficulties with spatial judgments, executive dysfunction, and working memory.
We also expect that at least half of the participants have hallucinations will also have Extracampine Hallucinations (EH) which are a feeling of movement passing them or of a presence that is that truly there. We do not expect that age or gender will be predictors for EH, but that EH would co-exist with other PD symptoms, such as memory decline and sleep issues.
Assessment of improvement will be made for only those participants who complete the all of the assessments at 12, 24, and 36 months. If the participants who do not complete the assessments we will not be able to indicate whether the assessments are effective at improving their quality of life and assisting us at with information regarding hallucinations. An important element of the current project is the assessment of difficulty of completing the assessments with each participant and obtaining feedback about their experiences.

Budget Justification

Funding is requested for a 40 graduate research assistants, each of whom will be assigned to a participant for all aspects of subject recruitment, assessment, and data collection. Additional 10% is requested for the principal researcher will who oversee the study and conduct data analysis and publication of results.
Subject payment of $100.00 for each payment (4000.00 total) is requester to reimburse subjects for their participation time.
Additional funding for will be used to purchase the assessments that will used to do the testing on the participants and office supplies that will be needed.
See Appendix A: Budget for detailed budget figures.
References

Aarons, S., Peisah, C., & Wijeratne, C. (2012). Neuropsychiatric effects of Parkinson’s disease
Treatment. Australasian Journal On Aging, 31(3), 198-202 5p. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6612.2012.00632.
Anderson, R. J., Simpson, A. C., Channon, S., Samuel, M., & Brown, R. G. (2013). Social
problem solving, social cognition, and mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease. Behavioral Neuroscience, 127(2), 184-192. doi:10.1037/a0030250
Benbir, G., Özekmekçi, S., Çinar, M., Beskardes, F., Apaydin, H., & Erginöz, E. (2006).
Features associated with the development of hallucinations in Parkinson’s disease. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 114(4), 239-243. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0404.2006.00644.x
Buoli, M., Caldiroli, A., & Altamura, A. C. (2016). Psychiatric Conditions in Parkinson Disease:
A Comparison With Classical Psychiatric Disorders. Journal Of Geriatric Psychiatry & Neurology, 29(2), 72. doi:10. 1177/0891988715606233
Friedman, J. (2013). Parkinson disease psychosis: Update. Behavioural Neurology, 27(4), 469-
477. doi: 10.3233/BEN-129016.
Gibson G, Mottram P, M Wilson K, et al. Frequency, prevalence, incidence and risk factors
associated with visual hallucinations in a sample of patients with Parkinson’s disease: a
longitudinal 4-year study. International Journal Of Geriatric Psychiatry [serial online].
June 2013; 28(6):626-631 6p. Available from: CINAHL with Full Text, Ipswich, MA.
Holt, R. J., Sklar, A. R., Darkow, T., Goldberg, G. A., Johnson, J. C., & Harley, C. R. (2010).
Prevalence of Parkinson’s disease-induced psychosis in a large U.S. managed care population. The Journal Of Neuropsychiatry And Clinical Neurosciences, 22(1), 105-110. doi:10.1176/appi.neuropsych.22.1.105
Katzen, H., Myerson, C., Papapetropoulos, S., Nahab, F., Gallo, B., & Levin, B. (2010). Multi-
Modal Hallucinations and Cognitive Function in Parkinson’s Disease. Dementia & Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 30(1), 51-56 6p.
Moustafa, A. A., Krishna, R., Frank, M. J., Eissa, A. M., & Hewedi, D. H. (2014). Cognitive
correlates of psychosis in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 19(5), 381-398. doi:10.1080/13546805.2013.877385.
Nation, D. A., Katzen, H. L., Papapetropoulos, S., Scanlon, B. K., & Levin, B. E. (2009).
Subthreshold depression in Parkinson’s disease. International Journal Of Geriatric
Psychiatry, 24(9), 937-943. doi:10.1002/gps.2199
Papapetropoulos, S., Katzen, H., Schrag, A., Singer, C., Scanlon, B. K., Nation, D., & … Levin,
B. (2008). A questionnaire-based (UM-PDHQ) study of hallucinations in Parkinson’s
disease. BMC Neurology, 81-8. doi:10.1186/1471-2377-8-21.
Rahman, A. A., Samah, I. A., & Saini, S. M. (2013). PSYCHOSIS IN PARKINSON’S
DISEASE PATIENTS. ASEAN Journal Of Psychiatry, 14(2), 96-102.
Schneider, F., Althaus, A., Backes, V., & Dodel, R. (2008). Psychiatric symptoms in
Parkinson’s diseases. European Archives Of Psychiatry & Clinical Neuroscience, 25855-
59. doi:10.1007/s00406-008-5012-4
Wada-Isoe, K., Ohta, K., Imamura, K., Kitayama, M., Nomura, T., Yasui, K., & … Nakashima,
K. (2008). Assessment of hallucinations in Parkinson’s disease using a novel scale. Acta
Neurologica Scandinavica, 117(1), 35-40. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0404.2007.00907.x
Wood, R. A., Hopkins, S. A., Moodley, K. K., & Chan, D. (2015). Fifty Percent Prevalence of
extracampine hallucinations in Parkinson’s Disease Patients. Frontiers In Neurology, 61-
9. doi:10.3389/fneur.2015.00263.

Appendix A: Budget
SUMMARY PROPOSAL BUDGET FOR INSTITUTION USE ONLY
ORGANIZATION

PROPOSAL NO. DURATION (MONTHS)
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR (PI)/PROJECT DIRECTOR
Instructor B. Jones, PhD AWARD NO.
A. PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PIs, Faculty, Graduate Assistants, etc. Funds
List each separately with name and title. Requested By
Proposer
1. Instructor B. Jones, PhD ($90,000/year) $9000
2. Research Assistants (RA) 1048.75 for 40 RA (1 for each participant) $41,950
TOTAL SALARIES $50.950
B. EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000.)
None

TOTAL EQUIPMENT $0
C. TRAVEL 1. DOMESTIC – PI attendance at national meeting $0
2. OTHER – Travel for RA to participants home $0
TOTALTRAVEL $0
D. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT $4,000
1. STIPENDS $ 100
2. TRAVEL
3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER

TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS (40) TOTAL PARTICIPANT COSTS $4000
E. OTHER DIRECT COSTS
1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES- Computer for patient training, data collection and analysis $2700
2. OTHER Assessments needed $1800
3 OTHER Office supplies $550
4. OTHER

TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS $5050.
F. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH E) $60,000
G. TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS (F&A) (Rate = 37.5%) $

H. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (F + G)
$60,000

Order this paper