The Circle of Security-Parenting (COS-P) group intervention has demonstrated efficacy in reducing maternal perinatal mental health difficulty (PMHD) symptoms in some contexts. The Circle of Security Intervention (COSI) study, a multisite, individually randomised, single-blind, parallel-arm controlled trial, was conducted in England to assess the clinical effectiveness of COS-P in reducing perinatal psychopathology, parenting and infant development, as well as its acceptability among the National Health Service (NHS) participants and staff. The main aim of this work is to estimate the cost-utility of COS-P plus treatment as usual (TAU) relative to TAU among mothers and birthing parents receiving NHS perinatal mental health services (PMHS) in England.

A within-trial economic evaluation was performed comparing COS-P plus TAU with TAU alone, using data from the COSI trial, which employed a 2:1 randomisation ratio. Analyses were conducted from both NHS and personal social services (PSS) and societal perspectives. A 12-month time horizon was used, consistent with the final trial follow-up.

Secondary care NHS perinatal health services across multiple centres in England.

A total of 371 mothers and birthing parents with PMHD were randomised and had complete economic outcome data; 248 received COS-P plus TAU and 123 received TAU alone. Participants were eligible if they were receiving NHS PMHS; exclusion criteria were defined in the trial protocol.

Participants in the intervention arm received the COS-P group programme in addition to TAU. The control group received TAU alone.

The primary economic outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 12 months, derived from the 5-level EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire - responses. Costs were estimated from NHS and PSS as well as societal perspectives, including healthcare utilisation and productivity losses due to work absence.

Compared with TAU, COS-P was associated with higher costs from both NHS and PSS (£180.58; 95% CI –£1075 to £1436) and societal (£72.94; 95% CI –£1473 to £1619) perspectives. COS-P was marginally less effective in terms of QALYs (–0.01; 95% CI –0.06 to 0.05). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated substantial uncertainty around cost and effectiveness estimates.

On average, COS-P was associated with higher costs and did not demonstrate improvements in health-related quality of life compared with TAU alone. Given the uncertainty surrounding the estimates, further research is warranted to explore potential longer term economic and clinical impacts of COS-P in perinatal mental health settings.

SRCTN18308962.

All children in England should receive a health review at 2–21/2 years, with the Ages and Stages Questionnaire third edition (ASQ-3) used to collect public health surveillance data on child development. However, practitioners also value tools that assess individual children’s development—consistent with ASQ-3’s original purpose. Concerns about licensing costs and barriers to digitalisation have prompted interest in alternative tools to the ASQ-3 in England.

To inform policy, we conducted a rapid scoping review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines to identify tools that can measure or assess early child development.

Searched PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science from January 2012 to November 2022, with targeted search update November 2024.

We included English-language studies published after January 2012 that described or evaluated tools in English which could measure or assess early child development in children

We extracted key features and reliability, validity, sensitivity and specificity of tools which could feasibly be implemented at the 2–21/2-year review (eg, including multiple age versions and

We identified 112 unique publications describing 34 tools; six met our feasibility criteria for the 2–21/2-year review (reported in 53 studies). Only ASQ-3 and CREDI offer domain-specific scoring—a government priority. ASQ-3 moderately detects mild delays and performs better for severe delays in at-risk groups. Caregiver Reported Early Development Instruments (CREDI) was designed for public health surveillance, and we do not yet know how it performs for individual assessment.

ASQ-3 and CREDI are most promising for use at the 2–21/2-year review. However, we lack UK-based validation and norming studies, even for ASQ-3. Ultimately, careful implementation and integration into existing systems will determine a tool’s value for identifying developmental needs, supporting families and producing high quality data for public health surveillance.

In middle-income to high-income countries, temporary accommodation (TA), regardless of type, is considered a form of homelessness. Families with young children living in these countries, in these circumstances, often become disconnected from friends, family and services (such as health and welfare support). The additional impact of pandemic restrictions on parents with children under 5 already living in TA had the potential to be considerable. However, this remains an area of limited research. To address this, this study explored the experiences of parents with children under 5, who lived in TA during the pandemic.

The research adopted a qualitative descriptive approach, using semi-structured telephone interviews with 41 families, to explore parents’ experiences of living in TA during the pandemic, with a child under 5. Interviews considered a broad range of factors such as housing quality, access to healthcare and education and the environment. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and then analysed using a thematic analysis approach.

Parent interviews identified that living in TA with a child under 5 during the pandemic impacted their access to services such as healthcare and ability to gather resources, while also affecting their mental health and general well-being. These parent experiences were detailed in three themes, including: (1) effect of restrictions on access, which included healthcare, environment and basic necessities; (2) impact on parents, which included mental health, physical and social impacts and (3) supports, including support services and networks.

The challenges conveyed by COVID-19 restrictions, on those already parenting a young child while living in TA, caused concerning health impacts for those affected, while also having potential developmental side effects on their children. This indicates the urgent need for targeted interventions and policies to support vulnerable families in TA, ensuring their well-being during crises and beyond.