Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren

Dr. Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2021 in Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ALAriel Maia Lyons-Warren
Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren
IHIsabella Herman
Isabella Herman
PHPatrick Hunt
Patrick Hunt
BABenjamin Arenkiel
Benjamin Arenkiel

20 January 2022 in Brain Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAriel Maia Lyons-Warren
Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren
MMMaria C. McCormack
Maria C. McCormack
JHJimmy Holder
Jimmy Holder
Sensory processing differences are an established feature of both syndromic and non-syndromic Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs). Significant work has been carried out to characterize and classify specific sensory profiles in non-syndromic autism. However, it is not known if syndromic autism disorders, such as Phelan-McDermid Syndrome (PMD) or SYNGAP1-related Intellectual Disability (SYNGAP1-ID), have unique sensory phenotypes. Understanding the sensory features of these disorders is important for providing appropriate care and for understanding their underlying mechanisms. Our objective in this work was to determine the sensory processing abnormalities present in two syndromic ASDs: Phelan-McDermid Syndrome and SYNGAP1-related Intellectual Disability. Using a standardized instrument, the Short Sensory Profile-2, we characterized sensory features in 41 patients with PMD and 24 patients with SYNGAP1-ID, and sub-scores were then calculated for seeking, avoiding, sensitivity and registration, as well as overall sensory and behavior scores. We found both patient groups exhibited atypical sensory features, including high scores in the areas of avoiding and seeking. Thus, we discovered significant sensory processing abnormalities are common in these syndromic ASDs. Measurements of sensory processing could serve as useful clinical endpoints for trials of novel therapeutics for these populations.

8 March 2024 in Research Integrity and Peer Review
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAriel Maia Lyons-Warren
Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren
WAWhitley W. Aamodt
Whitley W. Aamodt
KPKathleen M. Pieper
Kathleen M. Pieper
RSRoy E. Strowd
Roy E. Strowd
Background: Peer review is essential to the advancement of knowledge. However, training on how to conduct peer review is limited, unorganized, and not well studied. Thus, we sought to determine if a structured mentored peer-review program improved peer review training as measured by multiple quantitative and qualitative assessments. Methods: This pre-post intervention study enrolled 55 mentees across 5 cohorts from 2020 to 2023. Each cohort completed pre-program evaluations, participated in 2 mentored reviews, and completed post-program evaluations over 6 months. Mentors and mentees completed pre-program demographic and review experience questionnaires. Outcome measures included (1) total and sub-scores on the modified Review Quality Index (mRQI) applied to the same pre-selected research manuscript reviewed by mentees both pre and post intervention, (2) mentee self-perceived comfort with and understanding of the review process using a custom questionnaire, and (3) mentor satisfaction surveys. Pre- and post-program measures were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: Post-program total modified RQI score (median (IQR) = 31 (26.3–35.8)) was higher than pre-program total score (26.6 (19.7–29.7)) for the 42 mentees who completed both pre- and post-program reviews. Mentees reported improved perception of review (median (IQR) pre = 4 (3–4), post = 5 (4–5)) and editorial processes (pre = 3 (2–4), post = 4 (4–5)) as well as self-perceived confidence in completing an independent review of both scientific (median (IQR) pre = 2 (2–3), post = 4 (4–4)) and non-scientific (pre = 3 (2–4), post = 4 (4–5)) manuscripts following program participation. p < 0.0001 for all scores noted. Mentors reported high scores for enjoyment (median (range) 5/5 (3–5)) and interest in repeat participation (5/5 (2–5)). Conclusions: A 6-month structured mentored-review program including 2 mentored reviews improves peer review training as measured by the modified RQI as well as participant self-perceived understanding of publication science with high mentor satisfaction.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ALAriel Maia Lyons-Warren
Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren
MWMichael Wangler
Michael Wangler
YWYing-Wooi Wan
Ying-Wooi Wan
Autism spectrum disorder is a common, heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorder lacking targeted treatments. Additional features include restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviors and differences in sensory processing. We hypothesized that detailed sensory features including modality specific hyper- and hypo-sensitivity could be used to identify clinically recognizable subgroups with unique underlying gene variants. Participants included 378 individuals with a clinical diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder who contributed Short Sensory Profile data assessing the frequency of sensory behaviors and whole genome sequencing results to the Autism Speaks’ MSSNG database. Sensory phenotypes in this cohort were not randomly distributed with 10 patterns describing 43% (162/378) of participants. Cross comparison of two independent cluster analyses on sensory responses identified six distinct sensory-based subgroups. We then characterized subgroups by calculating the percent of patients in each subgroup who had variants with a Combined Annotation Dependent Depletion (CADD) score of 15 or greater in each of 24,896 genes. Each subgroup exhibited a unique pattern of genes with a high frequency of variants. These results support the use of sensory features to identify autism spectrum disorder subgroups with shared genetic variants.

11 July 2018 in American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ALAriel Maia Lyons-Warren
Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren
It has long been recognized that patients with neurological conditions, and particularly pediatric neurology patients, are well suited for palliative care because they frequently have a high symptom burden and variable prognoses. In 1996, the American Academy of neurology formally recognized a need for neurologists to “understand and apply the principles of palliative medicine.” Subsequently, some reviews have proposed a simultaneous care model in which palliative care is integrated for all neurology patients from the time of diagnosis. This article will review the current status of palliative care in pediatric neurology and discuss barriers to its integration.

23 April 2019 in American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ALAriel Maia Lyons-Warren
Ariel Maia Lyons-Warren
RSRobert C. Stowe
Robert C. Stowe
LELisa Emrick
Lisa Emrick
JJJill Ann Jarrell
Jill Ann Jarrell
Palliative care services are beneficial for pediatric neurology patients with chronic, life-limiting illnesses. However, timely referral to palliative care may be impeded due to an inability to identify appropriate patients. The aim of this pilot case–control study was to test a quantitative measure for identifying patients with unmet palliative care needs to facilitate appropriate referrals. First, a random subset of pediatric neurology patients were screened for number of hospital admissions, emergency center visits, and problems on the problem list. Screening results led to the hypothesis that having six or more hospital admissions in one year indicated unmet palliative care needs. Next, hospital admissions in the past year were counted for all patients admitted to the neurology service during a six-month period. Patients with six or more admissions as well as age- and gender-matched controls were assessed for unmet palliative care needs. In hospitalized pediatric neurology patients, having six or more admissions in the preceding year did not predict unmet palliative care needs. While this pilot study did not find a quantitative measure that identifies patients needing a palliative care consultation, the negative finding highlights an important distinction between unmet social needs that interfere with care and unmet palliative care needs. Further, the method of screening patients used in this study was simple to implement and provides a framework for future studies.