Public health research (Southampton, England)最新文献

{"title":"Learning Together for Mental Health: Rapid systematic review of reviews of school-level interventions to promote mental health and wellbeing.","authors":"Russell Viner, Semina Michalopoulou, Lee Hudson, Steven Hope, Oliver Lloyd-Houldey, Neisha Sundaram, Stephen Scott, Dasha Nicholls, Chris Bonell","doi":"10.3310/FFHR7745","DOIUrl":"10.3310/FFHR7745","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The high prevalence of mental health disorders among adolescents point to the need for interventions that prevent or minimise harms from these. Schools are the ideal setting for such interventions, given almost all children can be reached. We adapted a whole-school health intervention to target mental health. As part of this research, we aimed to provide schools with a report on mental health needs among their students and a menu of evidence-based actions that schools could take to address these needs. Given the multiple existing systematic reviews in this area, the actions to be included in the menu were informed by a rapid systematic review of reviews.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To identify effective school-level or simple interventions to address student needs across various domains of mental health in secondary schools or an equivalent phase, which have been identified in existing systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook a rapid systematic review of reviews. In January 2022, we searched three databases [PubMed, PsycInfo<sup>®</sup> (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, USA) and Cochrane Library] for systematic reviews of mental health interventions in the domains of: antisocial behaviour, anxiety, body image, depressive symptoms, digital health, eating problems, emotional issues, general well-being, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, questioning and other (LGBTQ+) inclusion, mental health first aid, physical activity for mental health, positive mental health, self-harm, student voice and substance use. Eligible for inclusion were systematic reviews of randomised trials or quasi-experimental studies evaluating school-based interventions among secondary school- or equivalent-aged children. We retrieved 95 reviews, of which 41 were eligible for the present review. We defined effective intervention strategies as those identified as being effective in an eligible study in any review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified a number of effective school-level or simple school interventions for addressing mental health in the above domains. Nine intervention focus areas were identified: (1) positive mental health and promotion of healthy development (five intervention strategies identified); (2) mental health literacy and awareness (six strategies); (3) LGBTQ+ mental health (two strategies); (4) mental health first aid (one strategy); (5) peer mentoring (two strategies); (6) support for transition from primary to secondary school (one strategy); (7) body image and body confidence (one strategy); (8) creative arts activities (one strategy); (9) physical activity (seven strategies) and (10) increasing access to nature (one strategy). Altogether, 27 strategies were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and limitations: </strong>This rapid review identified 27 evidence-based school-level strategies that were used to inform the development of a menu of evidence-based whole-school a","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1-34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145314294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"An interactive digital behaviour change intervention to decrease incidence of sexually transmitted infections among users of STI self-sampling websites: a feasibility RCT.","authors":"Katie Newby, Kayleigh Kwah, Lauren Schumacher, Rik Crutzen, Julia V Bailey, Louise J Jackson, Stephen Bremner, Katherine E Brown","doi":"10.3310/LKOT7404","DOIUrl":"10.3310/LKOT7404","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sexually transmitted infections such as chlamydia are common among young people. If left untreated, they can have serious health consequences. Condoms are recommended for prevention, but young people report often not using them for penetrative sex. Use of web-based sexually transmitted infection testing is increasing rapidly, but these services provide little support or advice on how to prevent future infections. 'Wrapped' is a web-based intervention that aims to support young users of web-based sexually transmitted infection testing to use condoms correctly every time they have penetrative sex, thus reducing future sexually transmitted infection incidence.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess whether and how it is possible to carry out a future randomised controlled trial of Wrapped.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A two-arm, parallel-group feasibility randomised controlled trial, with nested qualitative study, in which Wrapped in addition to usual care is tested against usual care alone.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Participants were recruited from five English local authority areas through one web-based sexually transmitted infection testing service.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Young people aged 16-24 years with internet access and who were likely to have penetrative sex during the study.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Wrapped interactive multimedia intervention. Control: Non-interactive web page with standard information on sexually transmitted infections and details about how to access condoms.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Proportion of sampling pool recruited and return of valid chlamydia self-sample at month (M)12. Other outcome measures: return of valid chlamydia self-sample at M3; completion of surveys at baseline, M3, M6 and M12; follow-up by demographic characteristics; and acceptability of intervention and measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 230 participants were recruited and randomised to the feasibility randomised controlled trial: 115 to the intervention group and 115 to the control. Of these, 173 (75.2%) self-reported the result of their first sexually transmitted infection test. This sub-sample ('restricted sample') best represents the true nature of the sample at full trial for which the baseline sexually transmitted infection test result is needed. Results which follow are therefore for this sample. Of the sampling pool, 1.5% were recruited. A valid chlamydia self-sample was returned by 75.7% at M12. Based on this information, 3574 participants, derived from a sampling pool of 238,266 service users, were estimated to be necessary to power a future full trial. Return of other follow-up measures was as follows: valid M3 chlamydia self-sample 75.1%, M3 survey 91.3%, M6 survey 90.8% and M12 survey 91.8%. Participants at M12 appeared to broadly represent individuals in the sampling pool with some limited exceptions: a tendency for over-represen","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"13 9","pages":"1-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145433014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Investigating differential effects of interventions to prevent obesity in children and young people: a novel analytic framework.","authors":"Francesca Spiga, Annabel L Davies, Jennifer C Palmer, Eve Tomlinson, Maddie Coleman, Elizabeth Sheldrick, Lucy Condon, Theresa Hm Moore, Deborah M Caldwell, Fiona B Gillison, Sharea Ijaz, James D Nobles, Jelena Savović, Rona Campbell, Carolyn Summerbell, Julian Pt Higgins","doi":"10.3310/QLPD8523","DOIUrl":"10.3310/QLPD8523","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effects of interventions to prevent obesity in children aged 5-18 years identified over 200 randomised trials. Interventions targeting diet, activity (including physical activity and sedentary behaviours) and both diet and activity appear to have small but beneficial effects on average. However, these effects varied between studies and might be explained by variation in characteristics of the interventions, for example, by the extent to which the children enjoyed the intervention or whether they aim to modify behaviour through education or physical changes to the environment. Here we develop a novel analytic framework to identify key intervention characteristics considered likely to explain differential effects.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To describe the development of the analytic framework, including the involvement of school-aged children, parents, teachers and other stakeholders, and to present the content of the finalised analytic framework and the results of the coding of the interventions.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>We first conducted a literature review to find out from the existing literature what different types of characteristics of interventions we should be thinking about and why. This information helped us to develop a comprehensive map (called a logic model) of these characteristics. We then used this logic model to develop a list of possible intervention characteristics. We held a series of workshops with children, parents, teachers and public health professionals to refine the list into a coding scheme. We then used this to code the characteristics of each intervention in all the trials which aimed to prevent obesity in children aged 5-18 years.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Our finalised analytic framework included 25 questions across 12 characteristics. These addressed aspects such as the setting of the intervention (e.g. at school, at home or in the community), mode of delivery (e.g. to individuals or to groups of children), whether the intervention targeted diet and/or activity, complexity (e.g. focused on a single swap of juice for water or aimed to change all aspects of the diet), intensity, flexibility, choice, mechanism of action (e.g. through participation, education, change in the social environment, change in the physical environment), resonance (e.g. credibility of the person delivering the intervention), commercial involvement and the 'fun factor' (as perceived by children). We coded 255 interventions from 210 randomised trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our evidence-based analytic framework, refined by consulting with stakeholders, allowed us to code 255 interventions aiming to prevent obesity in children aged 5-18 years. Our confidence in the validity of the framework and coding results is increased by our rigorous methods and, especially, the involvement of children at multiple stages.</p><p><str","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145433091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gathering baseline data to assess household energy interventions' impact on indoor air quality, occupant health, and wellbeing: In2Air a non-randomized experiment.","authors":"Jane Entwistle, Tarek Ahmed, Lindsay Bramwell, Graham Coulby, Michael E Deary, Olivia Mansell, Anil Namdeo, Richard McNally, Luke Vale, Adam Vaughan, Colin White","doi":"10.3310/SOSO8851","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/SOSO8851","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tackling climate change, together with improving indoor air quality, offers a significant opportunity to improve residents' health and well-being. This requires the evidence base to inform an energy-efficient retrofit design.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(i) To develop a protocol that could be implemented by local authorities across a range of housing typologies and (ii) to deploy this protocol to establish baseline conditions in <i>n</i> = 30 homes ahead of energy-efficient retrofitting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Working with the local council and the community, this baseline study (In2Air) developed and deployed a protocol across 30 single-storey one- and two-bedroom properties owned by Newcastle City Council, United Kingdom, and occupied by tenants (> 55 years). The following data were collected before homes underwent a fabric-first intervention: indoor and outdoor air quality (for ~3 weeks); energy consumption (for ~12 months); occupant behaviour and home-specific details; self-reported general health and well-being.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The collected baseline data indicated that the mean PM_2.5 (particulate matter < 2.5 µm in diameter) concentrations ranged from 3 to 24 µg/m³ (excluding three homes where smoking occurred indoors). No homes had monitoring period means above the current United Kingdom (2019) outdoor annual mean limit (25 µg/m³); however, 21 homes had monitoring period means above the current World Health Organization (2021) annual mean guidance value (5 µg/m³). Strong correlations were observed between indoor PM_2.5 and indoor PM₁₀ (particulate matter < 10 µm in diameter), suggesting similar sources, while no-to-weak correlations were observed between indoor carbon dioxide and indoor PM_2.5. Moderate-to-good ventilation was suggested by indoor concentrations of carbon dioxide across all the study homes. The lack of correlation between carbon dioxide and particulate matter highlights the need for housing professionals to add particulate matter to their usual indoor air quality assessment suite of carbon dioxide, temperature and humidity. Most homes had mean humidity levels within the range considered healthy (i.e. between 40% and 60%), with only three homes above this range. With respect to the baseline health and well-being scores, compared to the comparison population, data for this initial time point indicated most participants (83%) had a physical health score below the norm, which likely reflects the age (> 55 years) of the cohort. In comparison, the mental health score for most participants (74%) was at or above average. Here, the physical layout of the estate with communal amenities may well be engendering a positive sense of belonging. The mean/median ICEpop CAPability score suggests a high level of capability across the cohort.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our study focused on changes ","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1-49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145002171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effectiveness of Safe and Well Visits in reducing falls and improving quality of life among older people: The FIREFLI RCT.","authors":"Sarah Cockayne, Caroline Fairhurst, Rachel Cunningham-Burley, Jo Mann, Richard Stanford-Beale, Sarah Hampton, Sarah Wilkinson, Joy Adamson, Shelley Crossland, Avril Drummond, Catherine E Hewitt, Alison Pighills, Gareth Roberts, Sarah Ronaldson, Arabella Scantlebury, David J Torgerson","doi":"10.3310/DJHF6633","DOIUrl":"10.3310/DJHF6633","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Fire and rescue services in England routinely carry out Home Fire Safety Visits which aim to reduce risk of fire, support independent living and improve quality of life. The visits include a person-centred assessment and providing general advice on health-related topics such as preventing falls.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Planned objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Home Fire Safety Visits (also known as Safe and Well Visits) to reduce falls and improve quality of life in older adults living in the community.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design, setting and participants: &lt;/strong&gt;We designed a multicentre, randomised controlled trial with economic and qualitative evaluations, involving two fire and rescue services in England, to recruit 1156 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and over.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;All participants could continue to access routine care from healthcare professionals and were provided with a falls prevention leaflet as part of the trial. The intervention group were additionally offered a Home Fire Safety Visit. The usual care group were offered a visit after they had completed the trial. Blinding was not possible. Participants were randomised 1 : 1 using a secure web-based system.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcomes measures: &lt;/strong&gt;The primary outcomes were (1) the number of falls per participant and (2) health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version) over 12 months from randomisation. Secondary outcomes included fire risk-taking behaviours, loneliness, fear of falling and time to first fall. The planned economic evaluation comprised cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses. The qualitative study was designed to examine intervention fidelity and acceptability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;It proved impossible to conduct the trial as planned in the current research landscape. We faced significant delays in setting up and starting recruitment, in large part due to this coinciding with the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Obtaining regulatory approval took longer than anticipated. Additionally, we were unable to access general practitioner registration data to identify participants as planned and so we had to use Consumer Classification Platform data to identify potential households to send study invitations to. This resulted in a less targeted and non-personalised mail-out as this is not patient-level data so the householder names were unavailable. Ultimately, recruitment was much lower than expected. In total, 237 participants were assessed for eligibility and 63 randomised (intervention, &lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 32; usual care, &lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 31). The Home Fire Safety Visits were delivered as planned to both groups; however, the planned statistical and health economic analyses could not be conducted due to the limited data. Data from the qualitative evaluation indicated the intervention was largely acceptable to staff and service users.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Co","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"13 7","pages":"1-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145180803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Public preferences for health and non-health outcomes of Universal Basic Income and alternative income-based policies: A mixed-method feasibility study.","authors":"Neil McHugh, David Bomark, Rachel Baker, Verity Watson, Neil Craig, Ruth Lightbody, Clare Bambra, Victoria McGowan, Cam Donaldson","doi":"10.3310/ALDS8846","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/ALDS8846","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;The United Kingdom is experiencing worrying trends in population health. Policy needs to shift 'upstream' to address fundamental causes. Universal Basic Income has emerged as one response to tackling these health issues. A Universal Basic Income would provide a new form of societal safety net through a regular, unconditional cash payment to all individuals in society. However, with scarce public resources and competing upstream income-based policies, such as a Minimum Income Guarantee, implementing transformative initiatives, such as Universal Basic Income, without a public mandate is unlikely. Currently, we do not know the extent to which the general public value different income-based policies, including when wider impacts, such as health outcomes, are explicitly stated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;This feasibility study had two broad aims. First, to determine which income-based policies to select for valuation, based on their importance to stakeholders and coverage of a range of characteristics and outcomes; second, to design and test a framework, and associated methods, for stated preference elicitation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design and methods: &lt;/strong&gt;Six income-based policy scenarios - Universal Basic Income, Minimum Income Guarantee, Negative Income Tax, Participation Income, Targeted Basic Income and Universal Credit - were identified and developed through literature searches, stakeholder interviews (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 13) and consultation with our General Public Panel. Policy scenarios were described in terms of five policy characteristics and impact described qualitatively based on three outcomes - overall population health, health inequality and income inequality. Three trade-off-based stated preference methods - choice, ranking and willingness to pay - were used to elicit preferences. All methods adopted a socially inclusive perspective. Think-aloud and open-ended interview questions were asked to explore respondents' understanding of the survey methods and explore the reasons for respondents' decisions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;For the main survey, 50 members of the general public were sampled across Glasgow and Newcastle using recruitment targets for age, gender, education, income, employment status, ethnicity, benefits, voting preferences and health status.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Respondents understood the policy scenarios, the perspective they were asked to adopt when constructing their values and the task they were asked to complete in each of the survey methods. Relatively few respondents had fully inconsistent preferences, there was no evidence of a labelling effect and introducing information on outcomes did not impact preferences. The type of policy seems to matter, with respondents making trade-offs between policy type and the outcomes of improving overall health, health inequalities and/or income inequalities; there is also evidence of preference heterogeneity.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Limi","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144762628","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Group-based interventions to reduce gambling involvement among male football fans: a synopsis of findings from a feasibility study.","authors":"Gerda Reith, Blair Biggar, Chris Bunn, Manuela Deidda, Craig Donnachie, Frankie Graham, Cindy Gray, Nicola Greenlaw, Kate Hunt, Matthew Philpott, Neil Platt, Robert D Rogers, John Rooksby, Sally Wyke, Heather Wardle","doi":"10.3310/SWWP9393","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/SWWP9393","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gambling is associated with serious social and health harms, including suicidal ideation and suicide attempts. The risk of these adverse effects increases with consumption and imposes a substantial economic burden to the National Health Service and wider society, beyond the negative impacts on individuals and their families. Sports betting is a major growth area for the gambling industry. Sports bettors are disproportionately male and younger, two risk factors for gambling harms. It is important to develop and implement preventative interventions that limit the escalation of gambling harms among this group. We report on the feasibility of an intervention delivered within and by professional football clubs, a setting which has proved highly successful in attracting men to other behaviour change interventions (e.g. weight loss).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In what was originally designed as a three-phase study, a face-to-face group-based intervention (Football Fans and Betting) was refined in Phase 1, for delivery by trained community coaches at professional football club stadia. Eight 90-minute weekly sessions included interactive 'classroom-based' education around gambling behaviours, the industry and impacts, and group-based physical activity to promote social connectivity. Phase 2 assessed the feasibility of approaches to recruitment and retention and the acceptability of Football Fans and Betting to both coaches and participants. Phase 3 was intended to comprise a pragmatic, two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial of the Football Fans and Betting intervention at four professional football clubs in England.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data collected from participants and coaches via one-to-one interviews, observations and focus groups revealed significant barriers to recruitment, despite considerable iterative efforts to optimise 'branding' and strategies. Many of our target population did not perceive themselves as needing support. Instead, Football Fans and Betting was attractive to those with more severe gambling symptomology but who were ineligible as they required more specialist safeguarding support than Football Fans and Betting offered. It proved problematic to promote Football Fans and Betting as a programme to <i>prevent</i> progression to more serious gambling harms to men who were embedded in social networks where gambling was perceived as normal. The irony that many professional football clubs partner with gambling companies was noted by participants and some expressed scepticism around club intentions for delivering Football Fans and Betting. Despite considerable efforts to run Football Fans and Betting at six English professional football clubs during 2022 and 2023, insufficient numbers were recruited and retained. Phase 3 did not take place as progression to a pilot trial was unviable. Despite low numbers participating in Football Fans and Betting, those who undertook the programme found","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"13 6","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144683748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Feasibility study of Learning Together for Mental Health: fidelity, reach and acceptability of a whole-school intervention aiming to promote health and wellbeing in secondary schools.","authors":"Neisha Sundaram, Oliver Lloyd-Houldey, Joanna Sturgess, Elizabeth Allen, Semina Michalopoulou, Steven Hope, Rosa Legood, Stephen Scott, Lee D Hudson, Dasha Nicholls, Deborah Christie, Russell M Viner, Chris Bonell","doi":"10.3310/RTRT0202","DOIUrl":"10.3310/RTRT0202","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Despite high rates of adolescent mental health problems, there are few effective school-based interventions to address this. Whole-school interventions offer a feasible and sustainable means of promoting mental health, but to date, few have been evaluated. Previously we trialled the Learning Together intervention comprising local needs assessment, student and staff participation in decision-making, restorative practice, and a social and emotional skills curriculum. This was effective not only in preventing bullying (primary outcome) but also in promoting mental well-being and psychological functioning (secondary outcomes). We adapted Learning Together to develop Learning Together for Mental Health, focused on promoting mental health.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;This paper reports on quantitative data on intervention implementation fidelity, reach and acceptability to assess progression to a Phase III trial.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;We drew on student baseline and follow-up surveys and an integral process evaluation from a non-randomised feasibility study involving four secondary schools.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting: &lt;/strong&gt;Southern England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Students in year 8 (age 12/13) at baseline and year 10 (age 14/15) at follow-up and school staff and students and intervention trainers and facilitators completing process evaluation tools.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;Whole-school intervention featuring student needs assessment, action groups involving staff and students which selected actions from an evidence-based menu, restorative practice to improve relationships and address student behaviour and a social and emotional skills curriculum.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Restorative practice training was implemented with fidelity in all schools. Curriculum training was implemented with fidelity in three of four schools. The response rate to the needs survey across the three schools that participated was 79%. Action groups were implemented with fidelity. Action groups at all four schools completed at least one locally decided action and chose at least one action from the menu of evidence-based options. Restorative practice was implemented across all schools. Of lessons that were observed and lessons for which teachers returned logbooks, curriculum delivery was implemented with fidelity. However, two schools delivered 50% or less of the recommended lessons, and not all teachers completed logbooks. All students and staff completing surveys reported finding the Learning Together for Mental Health intervention a good way to promote student mental health. Over a third of students reported definite awareness of actions being undertaken by their schools to improve student mental health. All pre-defined progression criteria to proceed to a Phase III trial were met. The intervention was delivered with good fidelity and had strong acceptability.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Limitations: &lt;/strong&gt;Th","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144340769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Learning together for mental health: feasibility of measures to assess a whole-school mental health and wellbeing intervention in secondary schools.","authors":"Oliver Lloyd-Houldey, Joanna Sturgess, Neisha Sundaram, Steven Hope, Semina Michalopoulou, Elizabeth Allen, Lee Hudson, Stephen Scott, Dasha Nicholls, Deborah Christie, Rosa Legood, Chris Bonell, Russell Viner","doi":"10.3310/GFDT2323","DOIUrl":"10.3310/GFDT2323","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Population mental health in young people worsened during and since the COVID-19 pandemic. School environments can play a key role in improving young people's mental health. Learning Together for Mental Health is a whole-school intervention aiming to promote mental health and well-being among young people in secondary schools. Before progressing to a Phase III effectiveness evaluation of the intervention, it is critical to assess the feasibility of trial measures at baseline and follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To evaluate the feasibility of trial measures and procedures within a feasibility study of a whole-school intervention aiming to promote mental health and well-being among young people in secondary schools, including whether we met our progression criterion of survey response rates of 60% or more in two or more schools at baseline and follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design and methods: &lt;/strong&gt;We conducted a feasibility study which included assessment of the indicative primary and secondary outcomes measures and procedures to be used in a future Phase III trial.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting and participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Setting for our feasibility study included five state, mixed-sex secondary schools in southern England (one of which dropped out after baselines and one of which replaced this). We recruited year-7 students to participate in the baseline survey and year-10 students to participate in the follow-up survey at 12-month follow-up. Baseline and follow-up participants were different groups, as the focus was assessing feasibility of measures for the age groups that would be surveyed at baseline and follow-up in a Phase III randomised controlled trial. Our study was not powered or designed to estimate intervention effects.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;As part of our feasibility study, all schools received the Learning Together for Mental Health intervention for one academic school year.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcome measures: &lt;/strong&gt;The indicative primary outcome measure trialled was the total difficulties score of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Indicative secondary outcomes measures trialled were the: Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale; Short Moods and Feelings Questionnaire; Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 scale; Eating Disorders Examination - Questionnaire Short, self-harm (single item from the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study); bullying victimisation (Gatehouse Bullying Scale); cyberbullying (two items adapted from the Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating II questionnaire); substance use (National Health Service measure); and Beyond Blue School Climate Questionnaire.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Trial measures and procedures were feasible to implement and were acceptable to year-7 and year-10 students, teachers and parents. At baseline, response rates ranged from 58% to 91% between schools. Only two students were opted out by parents, and no students opted out","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144531546","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evaluating the effectiveness of the Drink Less smartphone app for reducing alcohol consumption compared with usual digital care: a comprehensive synopsis from a 6-month follow-up RCT.","authors":"Claire Garnett, Melissa Oldham, Gemma Loebenberg, Larisa Dinu, Emma Beard, Colin Angus, Robyn Burton, Matt Field, Felix Greaves, Matthew Hickman, Eileen Kaner, Susan Michie, Marcus Munafò, Elena Pizzo, Jamie Brown","doi":"10.3310/LNNB8060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/LNNB8060","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Digital interventions can be effective for reducing alcohol consumption. However, most digital interventions that have been evaluated are websites and there is little evidence on the effectiveness of smartphone apps, especially in a United Kingdom context. We developed an evidence- and theory-informed app, Drink Less, to help increasing-and-higher-risk drinkers (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test score ≥ 8) reduce their alcohol consumption.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To evaluate the effectiveness of Drink Less for reducing alcohol consumption compared with usual digital care in the United Kingdom.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;Two-arm, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with 1 : 1 group allocation and an embedded process evaluation, with 6-month follow-up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting: &lt;/strong&gt;Remotely conducted among participants living in the United Kingdom, recruited from July 2020 to March 2022.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Five thousand six hundred and two increasing-and-higher-risk drinkers aged 18+ who had access to an iPhone operating system device and wanted to drink less alcohol.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;Participants were recommended to use the intervention (Drink Less) or recommended the comparator (National Health Service alcohol advice web page). Drink Less is an app-based intervention to help increasing-and-higher-risk drinkers reduce their alcohol consumption. It consists of evidence-based modules (e.g. goal setting, self-monitoring) and was systematically and transparently developed and refined. The National Health Service alcohol advice web page was considered usual digital care and provides tips on cutting down.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcome measures: &lt;/strong&gt;The primary outcome was self-reported weekly alcohol consumption at 6-month follow-up (derived from the extended Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test - Consumption), adjusted for baseline alcohol consumption.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;The retention rate at 6-month follow-up was 80%. The data were not missing completely at random with differences detected in educational qualifications, occupation and income, indicating that multiple imputation was the most appropriate analytic approach. This found that Drink Less resulted in a 2.00 United Kingdom unit greater weekly reduction (95% confidence interval -3.76 to -0.24) at 6-month follow-up compared with the National Health Service alcohol advice web page. Compared with the National Health Service alcohol advice web page, Drink Less cost an additional £1.28 per user, when including the sunk costs (already incurred and cannot be recovered), but saved £0.04 per user when considering only the annual maintenance costs. Drink Less costs only an extra £0.64 per additional weekly unit of alcohol reduction, and may be cost saving if sufficient people use the app to cover the sunk costs. There was no statistically significant difference in quali","PeriodicalId":74615,"journal":{"name":"Public health research (Southampton, England)","volume":"13 5","pages":"1-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144303910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}