FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Determining the feasibility of a codesigned and personalised intervention (Veg4Me) to improve vegetable intake in young adults living in rural Australian communities: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Por: Livingstone · K. M. · Rawstorn · J. C. · Partridge · S. R. · Zhang · Y. · O · E. · Godrich · S. L. · McNaughton · S. A. · Hendrie · G. A. · Dullaghan · K. · Abbott · G. · Blekkenhorst · L. C. · Maddison · R. · Barnett · S. · Mathers · J. C. · Alston · L.
Introduction

Diets low in vegetables are a main contributor to the health burden experienced by young adults in rural communities. Digital health interventions provide an accessible delivery model that can be personalised to meet the diverse preferences of young adults. A personalisable digital vegetable intake intervention (Veg4Me) was codesigned to meet the needs of young adults living in rural communities. This study will determine the feasibility of delivering a personalised Veg4Me programme and compare preliminary effects with a non-personalised Veg4Me (control).

Methods and analysis

A 12-week assessor-blinded, two-arm, parallel randomised controlled trial will be undertaken from August 2023 until April 2024. A total of 150 eligible and consenting young adults (18–35 years; eat

Ethics and dissemination

All procedures involving human subjects were approved by Deakin University’s Human Ethics Advisory Group—Health (HEAG-H 06_2023) on 6 March 2023. Dissemination events will be held in the City of Greater Bendigo and the Colac Otway Shire. Summaries of the results will be disseminated to participants via email. Results will be disseminated to the scientific community through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

Trial registration number

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12623000179639p, prospectively registered on 21 February 2023, according to the World Health Organizational Trial Registration Data Set. Universal Trial Number U1111-1284-9027.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on characteristics, extent and trends in child maltreatment in 34 Euro-CAN COST Action countries: a scoping review protocol

Por: Cankardas · S. · Tagiyeva-Milne · N. · Loiseau · M. · Naughton · A. · Grylli · C. · Sammut - Scerri · C. · Pivoriene · J. · Schöggl · J. · Pantazidou · A. · Quantin · C. · Mora-Theuer · E. A.
Introduction

While the factors commonly associated with an increased risk of child maltreatment (CM) were found to be increased during COVID-19, reports of actual maltreatment showed varying trends. Similarly, evidence regarding the impact of COVID-19 on CM within the European Cooperation on Science and Technology and Network Collaborative (COST) Action countries remains inconsistent. This scoping review aims to explore the extent and nature of evidence pertaining to CM within the countries affiliated with the Child Abuse and Neglect in Europe Action Network (Euro-CAN), funded by the COST.

Methods and analysis

Key electronic databases were searched to identify eligible papers, reports and other material published between January 2020 and April 2023: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice, Scopus and Web of Science. To cover the breadth of evidence, a systematic and broad search strategy was applied using a combination of keywords and controlled vocabulary for four concepts: children, maltreatment, COVID-19 and Euro-CAN countries, without restrictions on study design or language. Grey literature was searched in OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Two reviewers will independently screen full-text publications for eligibility and undertake data extraction, using a customised grid. The screening criteria and data charting will be piloted by the research team.

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews will be followed to present the results. Results will be summarised in a tabular form and narratively.

Ethics and dissemination

This review will identify and summarise publicly available data, without requiring ethical approval. The findings will be disseminated to the Euro-CAN Network and reported to the COST Association. They will also be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This protocol is registered on Open Science Framework.

Consensus building on definitions and types of child maltreatment to improve recording and surveillance in Europe: protocol for a multi-sectoral, European, electronic Delphi study

Por: Nurmatov · U. · Cowley · L. E. · Rodrigues · L. B. · Naughton · A. · Debelle · G. · Alfandari · R. · Lamela · D. · Otterman · G. · Jud · A. · Ntinapogias · A. · Laajasalo · T. · Soldino · V. · Stancheva · V. · Caenazzo · L. · Vaughan · R. · Christian · C. W. · Drabarek · K. · Kemp · A. M.
Introduction

Child maltreatment (CM) is a complex global public health issue with potentially devastating effects on individuals’ physical and mental health and well-being throughout the life course. A lack of uniform definitions hinders attempts to identify, measure, respond to, and prevent CM. The aim of this electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) study is to build consensus on definitions and types of CM for use in surveillance and multi-sectoral research in the 34 countries in the Euro-CAN (Multi-Sectoral Responses to Child Abuse and Neglect in Europe) project (COST Action CA19106).

Methods and analysis

The e-Delphi study will consist of a maximum of three rounds conducted using an online data collection platform. A multi-disciplinary expert panel consisting of researchers, child protection professionals (health and social care), police, legal professionals and adult survivors of CM will be purposefully recruited. We will approach approximately 100 experts, with between 50 and 60 of these anticipated to take part. Participants will rate their agreement with a range of statements relating to operational definitions and types of CM, and free-text comments on each of the statements to give further detail about their responses and areas of uncertainty. Consensus has been defined a priori as ≥70% of the panel agreeing or disagreeing with the statement after the final round. The responses to the open-ended questions will be analysed using a ‘codebook’ approach to thematic analysis, and used to refine the statements between rounds where no consensus is reached.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval has been granted from the Cardiff University School of Medicine ethics committee (reference number SMREC22/96). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at workshops (including for the participants) and international academic conferences. The Euro-CAN network will also be used to disseminate the results, with results briefings and presentations to key public health and other relevant organisations in the field.

❌