BioMD-Y is a comprehensive biobank study of children and adolescents with major depression (MD) and their healthy peers in Germany, collecting a host of both biological and psychosocial information from the participants and their parents with the aim of exploring genetic and environmental risk and protective factors for MD in children and adolescents.

Children and adolescents aged 8–18 years are recruited to either the clinical case group (MD, diagnosis of MD disorder) or the typically developing control group (absence of any psychiatric condition).

To date, four publications on both genetic and environmental risk and resilience factors (including FKBP5, glucocorticoid receptor activation, polygenic risk scores, psychosocial and sociodemographic risk and resilience factors) have been published based on the BioMD-Y sample.

Data collection is currently scheduled to continue into 2026. Research questions will be further addressed using available measures.

Among people experiencing severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD), poor oral health is common and linked to smoking, substance use and high sugar intake. Studies have explored interventions addressing oral health and related behaviours; however, factors related to the implementation of these interventions remain unclear. This mixed-methods systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence on the implementation and sustainability of interventions to improve oral health and related health behaviours among adults experiencing SMD.

Bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EBSCO, Scopus) and grey literature were searched from inception to February 2023. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were screened and extracted independently by two researchers. Quality appraisal was undertaken, and results were synthesised using narrative and thematic analyses.

Seventeen papers were included (published between 1995 and 2022). Studies were mostly of moderate quality and included views from SMD groups and service providers. From the qualitative synthesis, most findings were related to aspects such as trust, resources and motivation levels of SMD groups and service providers. None of the studies reported on diet and none included repeated offending (one of the aspects of SMD). From the quantitative synthesis, no difference was observed in programme attendance between the interventions and usual care, although there was some indication of sustained improvements in participation in the intervention group.

This review provides some evidence that trust, adequate resources and motivation levels are potentially important in implementing interventions to improve oral health and substance use among SMD groups. Further research is needed from high quality studies and focusing on diet in this population.

CRD42020202416.

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of using a removable boot versus a cast following ankle fracture from the National Health Service and Personal Social Services (NHS+PSS) payer and societal perspectives and explore the impact of both treatments on participants’ activities of daily living.

Cost-effectiveness analyses and qualitative interviews performed alongside a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Eight UK NHS secondary care trusts.

243 participants (60.5% female, on average 48.2 years of age (SD 16.4)) with ankle fracture. Qualitative interviews with 16 participants. Interventions removable air boot versus plaster cast 2 weeks after surgery weight bearing as able with group-specific exercises.

Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) estimated from the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, costs and incremental net monetary benefit statistics measured 12 weeks after surgery, for a society willing-to-pay £20 000 per QALY.

Care in the boot group cost, on average, £88 (95% CI £22 to £155) per patient more than in the plaster group from the NHS+PSS perspective. When including all societal costs, the boot saved, on average, £676 per patient (95% CI –£337 to £1689). Although there was no evidence of a QALY difference between the groups (–0.0020 (95% CI –0.0067 to 0.0026)), the qualitative findings suggest participants felt the boot enhanced their quality of life. Patients in the boot felt more independent and empowered to take on family responsibilities and social activities.

While the removable boot is slightly more expensive than plaster cast for the NHS+PSS payer at 12 weeks after surgery, it reduces productivity losses and the need for informal care while empowering patients. Given that differences in QALYs and costs to the NHS are small, the decision to use a boot or plaster following ankle surgery could be left to patients’ and clinicians’ preferences.

ISRCTN15497399, South Central—Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (reference 14/SC/1409).

This study aimed to evaluate the prospective cost-effectiveness of the Identification and Referral to Improve Safety plus (IRIS+) intervention compared with usual care using feasibility data derived from seven UK general practice sites.

A cost–utility analysis was conducted to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of IRIS+, an enhanced model of the UK’s usual care. IRIS+ assisted primary care staff in identifying, documenting and referring not only women, but also men and children who may have experienced domestic violence/abuse as victims, perpetrators or both. A perpetrator group programme was not part of the intervention per se but was linked to the IRIS+ intervention via a referral pathway and signposting. A Markov model was constructed from a societal perspective to estimate mean incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of IRIS+ compared with to usual care over a 10-year time horizon.

The IRIS+ intervention saved £92 per patient and produced QALY gains of 0.003. The incremental net monetary benefit was positive (£145) and the IRIS+ intervention was cost-effective in 55% of simulations at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY.

The IRIS+ intervention could be cost-effective or even cost saving from a societal perspective in the UK, though there are large uncertainties, reflected in the confidence intervals and simulation results.

The abbreviated World Health Organisation Quality of Life tool (WHOQOL-BREF) is a short-form quality of life (QoL) assessment commonly used worldwide in both healthy and ill populations. Normative data for the Australian general population are limited. The objective of this study was to present normative data for the WHOQOL-BREF based on a general population sample. A secondary aim was to explore sociodemographic factors related to QoL.

Population-based cross-sectional study.

929 men and 830 women aged 24–94 years participating in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.

The 26-item WHOQOL-BREF.

Means and SD for each domain are presented by age group and sex. Percentile scores were also generated. Mean scores for WHOQOL-BREF domains were 74.52 (SD=16.22) for physical health, 72.07 (SD=15.35) for psychological, 72.87 (SD=18.78) for social relationships and 79.68 (SD=12.55) for environment. We identified significant associations between sociodemographic factors and WHOQOL-BREF domains. Notably, being married or in a relationship was associated with increased odds for high QoL across all four WHOQOL-BREF domains: physical health (women OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.44, p=0.003), psychological (men OR 2.07, 95% CI: 1.20 to 3.55, p=0.009; women OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.81, p=0.009), social relationships (men OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.04, p=0.005; women OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.42 to 5.41, p=0.003) and environment (women OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.80, p=0.019).

This study provides population norms for the WHOQOL-BREF based on a representative sample of Australian adults. Our results will be useful to researchers and clinicians who can use these data as a reference point for interpreting WHOQOL-BREF scores.

The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of using SUpported Motivational InTerviewing (SUMIT) to increase physical activity in people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

Randomised controlled trial.

We recruited people who had completed Good Life with osteoArthritis Denmark (GLA:D) from private, public and community settings in Victoria, Australia.

Participants were randomised participants to receive SUMIT or usual care. SUMIT comprised five motivational interviewing sessions targeting physical activity over 10 weeks, and access to a multimedia web-based platform.

Thirty-two participants were recruited (17 SUMIT, 15 control) including 22 females (69%).

Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rate, adherence to motivational interviewing, ActivPAL wear and drop-out rate. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated for daily steps, stepping time, time with cadence >100 steps per minute, time in bouts >1 min; 6 min walk distance, Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales (pain, symptoms, function, sport and recreation, and quality of life (QoL)), Euroqual, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, waist circumference, 30 s chair stand test and walking speed during 40 m walk test.

All feasibility criteria were achieved, with 32/63 eligible participants recruited over seven months; with all participants adhering to all motivational interviewing calls and achieving sufficient ActivPAL wear time, and only two drop-outs (6%).

12/15 outcome measures showed at least a small effect (ES>0.2) favouring the SUMIT group, including daily time with cadence >100 steps per minute (ES=0.43). Two outcomes, walking speed (ES= 0.97) and KOOS QoL (ES=0.81), showed a large effect (ES>0.8).

SUMIT is feasible in people with knee osteoarthritis. Potential benefits included more time spent walking at moderate intensity, faster walking speeds and better QoL.

ACTRN12621000267853.