This study aimed to examine the association of midlife fitness and body mass index (BMI) with incident dementia later in life.

A cohort study of 6428 individuals (mean age 50.9±7.6 years) from the Cooper Center Longitudinal Study.

Cardiorespiratory fitness and BMI were assessed twice (1970–1999) during visits to the Cooper Clinic, a preventive medicine clinic in Dallas, Texas. These measures were examined as continuous and categorical variables. As continuous variables, fitness and BMI were examined at baseline (averaged of two examinations) and as absolute change between exams (mean time 2.1±1.8 years). Variables were categorised: unfit versus fit and normal versus overweight/obese. Medicare claims data were used to obtain all-cause dementia incidence (1999–2009). Mean follow-up between midlife examinations and Medicare surveillance was 15.7 ((SD=6.2) years. Multivariable models were used to assess the associations between fitness, BMI and dementia.

During 40 773 person years of Medicare surveillance, 632 cases of dementia were identified. After controlling for BMI and covariates, each 1-metabolic equivalent increment in fitness was associated with 5% lower (HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90 to 0.99) dementia risk. In comparison, after controlling for fitness and covariates, each 1 kg/m² increment in BMI was associated with a 3.0% (HR 1.03; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.07) higher risk for dementia, yet without significance (p=0.051). Similar findings were observed when the exposures were categorised. Changes in fitness and BMI between examinations were not related to dementia. Jointly, participants who were unfit and overweight/obese had the highest (HR 2.28 95% CI 1.57 to 3.32) dementia risk compared with their fit and normal weight counterparts.

Lower midlife fitness is a risk marker for dementia irrespective of weight status. Being unfit coupled with overweight/obese status might increase one’s risk for dementia even further.

The Core Outcome Measures for Improving Care (COM-IC) project aims to deliver practical recommendations on the selection and implementation of a suite of core outcomes to measure the effectiveness of interventions for dementia care.

COM-IC embeds a participatory action approach to using the Alignment–Harmonisation–Results framework for measuring dementia care in Australia. Using this framework, suitable core outcome measures will be identified, analysed, implemented and audited. The methods for analysing each stage will be codesigned with stakeholders, through the conduit of a Stakeholder Reference Group including people living with dementia, formal and informal carers, aged care industry representatives, researchers, clinicians and policy actors. The codesigned evaluation methods consider two key factors: feasibility and acceptability. These considerations will be tested during a 6-month feasibility study embedded in aged care industry partner organisations.

COM-IC has received ethical approval from The University of Queensland (HREC 2021/HE001932). Results will be disseminated through networks established over the project, and in accordance with both the publication schedule and requests from the Stakeholder Reference Group. Full access to publications and reports will be made available through UQ eSpace (https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/), an open access repository hosted by The University of Queensland.

Lyme disease (LD) is the most frequent tick-borne disease in the moderate climates of Europe. This study will inform the phase III efficacy study for Pfizer and Valneva’s investigational Lyme disease vaccine, VLA15. VLA15 phase III will be conducted in the USA and Europe due to the vaccine’s serotype coverage and public health burden of LD. In Europe, the existence and location of sites that have access to populations with high LD annual incidence is uncertain. This active, prospective surveillance study assesses annual LD incidence at general practice (GP)/primary care sites, allowing for phase III site vetting and better characterisation of LD burden in selected regions for study size calculations.

This burden of Lyme disease (BOLD) study will assess LD incidence overall and by site at 15 GP/primary care practices in endemic areas of 6 European countries from Spring 2021 to December 2022 and will be summarised with counts (n), percentages (%) and associated 95% CIs. Suspected LD cases identified from site’s practice panels are documented on screening logs, where clinical LD manifestations, diagnoses and standard of care diagnostic results are recorded. In the initial 12-month enrolment phase, suspected LD cases are offered enrolment. Participants undergo interview and clinical assessments to establish medical history, final clinical diagnosis, clinical manifestations and quality of life impact. Study-specific procedures include LD serology, skin punch biopsies and Lyme manifestation photographs. For every enrolled participant diagnosed with LD, 6–10 age-matched controls are randomly selected and offered enrolment for an embedded LD risk factor analysis. Persistent symptoms or post-treatment LD will be assessed at follow-up visits up to 2 years after initial diagnosis, while patients remain symptomatic.

This study has been approved by all sites’ local ethics committees. The results will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

There are substantial inequities in oral health access and outcomes in the USA, including by income and racial and ethnic identity. People with adverse social determinants of health (aSDoH), such as housing or food insecurity, are also more likely to have unmet dental needs. Many patients with dental problems present to the emergency department (ED), where minimal dental care or referral is usually available. Nonetheless, the ED represents an important point of contact to facilitate screening and referral for unmet oral health needs and aSDoH, particularly for patients who may not otherwise have access to care.

Mapping Oral health and Local Area Resources is a randomised controlled trial enrolling 2049 adult and paediatric ED patients with unmet oral health needs into one of three trial arms: (a) a standard handout of nearby dental and aSDoH resources; (b) a geographically matched listing of aSDoH resources and a search link for identification of geographically matched dental resources; or (c) geographically matched resources along with personalised care navigation. Follow-up at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months will evaluate oral health-related quality of life, linkage to resources and dental treatment, ED visits for dental problems and the association between linkage and neighbourhood resource density.

All sites share a single human subjects review board protocol which has been fully approved by the Mass General Brigham Human Subjects Review Board. Informed consent will be obtained from all adults and adult caregivers, and assent will be obtained from age-appropriate child participants. Results will demonstrate the impact of addressing aSDoH on oral health access and the efficacy of various forms of resource navigation compared with enhanced standard care. Our findings will facilitate sustainable, scalable interventions to identify and address aSDoH in the ED to improve oral health and reduce oral health inequities.

NCT05688982.

Head and neck cancer is the eighth most common cancer in the UK. Current standard of care treatment for patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell head and neck carcinoma (HNSCC) is platinum-based chemotherapy combined with the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody, cetuximab. However, most patients will have poor median overall survival (OS) of 6–9 months despite treatment. HNSCC tumours exhibit an immune landscape poised to respond to immunotherapeutic approaches, with most tumours expressing the immunosuppressive receptor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). We undertook the current study to determine the safety and efficacy of avelumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the interaction between PD-L1 and its receptor on cytotoxic T-cells, in combination with cetuximab.

This is a multi-centre, single-arm dose de-escalation phase II safety and efficacy study of avelumab combined with cetuximab; the study was to progress to a randomised phase II trial, however, the study will now complete after the safety run-in component. Up to 16 participants with histologically/cytologically recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma (including HNSCC) who have not received cetuximab previously will be recruited. All patients will receive 10 mg/kg avelumab and cetuximab (500, 400 or 300 mg/m² depending on the cohort open at time of registration) on days 1 and 15 of 4-week cycles for up to 1 year, (avelumab not given cycle 1 day 1). A modified continual reassessment method will be used to determine dose de-escalation. The primary objective is to establish the safety of the combination and to determine the optimum dose of cetuximab. Secondary objectives include assessing evidence of antitumour activity by evaluating response rates and disease control rates at 6 and 12 months as well as progression-free and OS.

Approval granted by City and East REC (18/LO/0021). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at conferences.

NCT03494322.

Women from social disadvantage are at greater risk of poor birth outcomes. The midwife-led continuity of care (MCC) model, which offers flexible and relational care from a small team of midwives, has demonstrated improved birth outcomes. In the general population, the impact of MCC on socially disadvantaged women and on birth outcomes is still unclear. This protocol describes a pragmatic evaluation of the MCC model in a socially disadvantaged population.

An open-labelled individual prospective randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis, from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2024.

Women will be randomly allocated to MCC or standard care as part of usual midwifery practice. Participants and midwives will not be blinded, but researchers will be. An internal pilot will test the feasibility of this process.

Participants are those randomised into MCC or standard care, who consent to participate in one of two Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohort studies. Outcomes are taken from routinely linked health data, supplemented by additional data capture. The sample size is fixed by the capacity of MCC teams, commissioning duration and numbers recruited into the cohort. The estimated maximum fixed sample size is 1,410 pregnancies (minimum 734).

Intention to treat (ITT) analysis will be undertaken to assess the impact of MCC on two independent primary outcomes. An economic evaluation will explore the impact on health resource use and a process evaluation will explore fidelity to the MCC model, and barriers/facilitators to implementation from midwives’ and women’s perspectives.

Ethical approval has been obtained for the randomisation in midwifery practice, use of the cohort data for evaluation and for the process evaluation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and translated into policy briefings.

IsRCTNhttps://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN31836167

This study aimed to examine the association between anxiety disorders and/or major depression disorder (ADs/MDD) and all-cause mortality in a 50-year perspective and to examine specific risk and health factors that may influence such an association.

Observational population study, 1968–2019.

The Population Study of Women in Gothenburg, Sweden (PSWG).

In 1968–1969, 899 (out of 1462) women from PSWG were selected according to date of birth for a psychiatric investigation, including diagnostic evaluation. Eight hundred (89%) were accepted. Twenty-two women were excluded. Of the 778 included, 135 participants (17.4 %) had solely ADs, 32 (4.1%) had solely MDD and 25 (3.2%) had comorbid AD/MDD.

Associations between ADs, MDD, comorbid AD/MDD and all-cause mortality with adjustments for potential confounding factors. Differences between the groups concerning health and risk factors and their association with mortality.

In a fully adjusted model, ADs were non-significantly associated with all-cause mortality (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.41). When examining age during risk time as separate intervals, a significant association between mortality and AD was seen in the group of participants who died at the age of 65–80 years (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.29). In the younger or older age interval, the association did not reach significance at the 95% level of confidence. Among confounding factors, smoking and physical activity were the strongest contributors. The association between smoking and mortality tended to be further increased in the group with ADs versus the group without such disorders (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.75 and HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.12, respectively).

This study suggests potential links between ADs, age and mortality among women with 50 years of follow-up, but does not provide definitive conclusions due to the borderline significance of the results.

Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes.

The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial.

The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages.

The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers.

The study has been approved by the London—Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants.

ISRCTN13296529.

The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) is one of the most used tools to measure health-related quality of life in heart failure. Despite extensive use in research, evidence on the MLHFQ’s internal structure validity remains heterogeneous and inconclusive. There are no known reviews that systematically summarise the evidence related to the MLHFQ’s factor structure (internal structure validity). This gap highlights a need to critically appraise, summarise and compare the available evidence on the internal structure and internal consistency reliability (ICR) of the MLHFQ.

The review will adhere to the reporting guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. We will systematically search eleven electronic databases/search engines (Medline, EMBASE, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, Global Health, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Scopus, Journals, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Dissertation and Theses Global) for quantitative studies assessing the MLHFQ’s factor structure and ICR. Two reviewers will then independently screen studies for eligibility and assess the quality of included studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments checklist. Throughout the review, discrepancies will be resolved through consensus or by the involvement of the third reviewer. We will analyse and present results using descriptive statistics (frequencies, proportions and ranges) and narrative synthesis. We will include all the relevant studies published within the timeframe covered by the database. We carried out the preliminary search in November 2022 except for Dissertation and Theses Global which was searched in September 2023; however, we will update the entire search right before the review completion in January 2024.

Ethical approval is not required as no primary data is being collected from individuals. We intend to share the findings of the review at international conferences and publish manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals.

CRD42023346919.