Invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella (iNTS) serovars are a major cause of community-acquired bloodstream infections in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). In this setting, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium accounts for two-thirds of infections and is associated with an estimated case fatality rate of 15%–20%. Several iNTS vaccine candidates are in early-stage assessment which—if found effective—would provide a valuable public health tool to reduce iNTS disease burden. The CHANTS study aims to develop a first-in-human Salmonella Typhimurium controlled human infection model, which can act as a platform for future vaccine evaluation, in addition to providing novel insights into iNTS disease pathogenesis.

This double-blind, safety and dose-escalation study will randomise 40–80 healthy UK participants aged 18–50 to receive oral challenge with one of two strains of S. Typhimurium belonging to the ST19 (strain 4/74) or ST313 (strain D23580) lineages. 4/74 is a global strain often associated with diarrhoeal illness predominantly in high-income settings, while D23580 is an archetypal strain representing invasive disease-causing isolates found in SSA. The primary objective is to determine the minimum infectious dose (colony-forming unit) required for 60%–75% of participants to develop clinical or microbiological features of systemic salmonellosis. Secondary endpoints are to describe and compare the clinical, microbiological and immunological responses following challenge. Dose escalation or de-escalation will be undertaken by continual-reassessment methodology and limited within prespecified safety thresholds. Exploratory objectives are to describe mechanisms of iNTS virulence, identify putative immune correlates of protection and describe host–pathogen interactions in response to infection.

Ethical approval has been obtained from the NHS Health Research Authority (London—Fulham Research Ethics Committee 21/PR/0051; IRAS Project ID 301659). The study findings will be disseminated in international peer-reviewed journals and presented at national/international stakeholder meetings. Study outcome summaries will be provided to both funders and participants.

NCT05870150

Purrble, a socially assistive robot, was codesigned with children to support in situ emotion regulation. Preliminary evidence has found that LGBTQ+ youth are receptive to Purrble and find it to be an acceptable intervention to assist with emotion dysregulation and their experiences of self-harm. The present study is designed to evaluate the impact of access to Purrble among LGBTQ+ youth who have self-harmful thoughts, when compared with waitlist controls.

The study is a single-blind, randomised control trial comparing access to the Purrble robot with waitlist control. A total of 168 LGBTQ+ youth aged 16–25 years with current self-harmful ideation will be recruited, all based within the UK. The primary outcome is emotion dysregulation (Difficulties with Emotion Regulation Scale-8) measured weekly across a 13-week period, including three pre-deployment timepoints. Secondary outcomes include self-harm (Self-Harm Questionnaire), anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7) and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9). We will conduct analyses using linear mixed models to assess primary and secondary hypotheses. Intervention participants will have unlimited access to Purrble over the deployment period, which can be used as much or as little as they like. After all assessments, control participants will receive their Purrble, with all participants keeping the robot after the end of the study. After the study has ended, a subset of participants will be invited to participate in semistructured interviews to explore engagement and appropriation of Purrble, considering the young people’s own views of Purrble as an intervention device.

Ethical approval was received from King’s College London (RESCM-22/23-34570). Findings will be disseminated in peer review open access journals and at academic conferences.

NCT06025942.

The economic consequences of untreated surgical disease are potentially large. The aim of this study was to estimate the economic burden associated with unmet surgical needs in Liberia.

A nationwide enumeration of surgical procedures and providers was conducted in Liberia in 2018. We estimated the number of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) saved by operative activities and converted these into economic losses averted using gross national income per capita and value of a statistical life (VSL) approaches. The total, the met and the unmet needs for surgery were determined, and economic losses caused by unmet surgical needs were estimated. Finally, we valued the economic losses avoided by various surgical provider groups.

A total of 55 890 DALYs were averted by surgical activities in 2018; these activities prevented an economic loss of between US$35 and US$141 million. About half of these values were generated by the non-specialist physician workforce. Furthermore, a non-specialist physician working a full-time position for 1 year prevented an economic loss of US$717 069 using the VSL approach, while a specialist resident and a certified specialist saved US$726 606 and US$698 877, respectively. The burden of unmet surgical need was associated with productivity losses of between US$388 million and US$1.6 billion; these losses equate to 11% and 46% of the annual gross domestic product for Liberia.

The economic burden of untreated surgical disease is large in Liberia. There is a need to strengthen the surgical system to reduce ongoing economic losses; a framework where specialist and non-specialist physicians collaborate may result in better economic return than a narrower focus on training specialists alone.

The Modern Innovative Solutions to Improve Outcomes in Asthma, Breathlessness and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) (MABC) service aimed to enhance disease management for chronic respiratory conditions through specialist multidisciplinary clinics, predominantly in the community. This study assesses the outcomes of these clinics.

This study used a prospective, longitudinal, participatory action research approach.

The study was conducted in primary care practices across Hampshire, UK.

Adults aged 16 years and above with poorly controlled asthma or COPD, as well as those with undifferentiated breathlessness not under specialist care, were included.

Participants received care through the multidisciplinary, specialist-led MABC clinics.

Primary outcomes included disease activity, quality of life and healthcare utilisation. Secondary outcomes encompassed clinic attendance, diagnostic changes, patient activation, participant and healthcare professional experiences and cost-effectiveness.

A total of 441 participants from 11 general practitioner practices were recruited. Ninety-six per cent of participants would recommend MABC clinics. MABC assessments led to diagnosis changes for 64 (17%) participants with asthma and COPD and treatment adjustments for 252 participants (57%). Exacerbations decreased significantly from 236 to 30 after attending the clinics (p

Specialist-supported multidisciplinary teams in MABC clinics improved diagnosis accuracy and adherence to guidelines. High patient satisfaction, disease control improvements and reduced exacerbations resulted in decreased unscheduled healthcare use and cost savings.

NCT03096509.

There is an urgent need for scalable strategies for treating overweight and obesity in clinical settings. PROPS 2.0 (Partnerships for Reducing Overweight and Obesity with Patient-Centered Strategies 2.0) aims to adapt and implement the combined intervention from the PROPS Study at scale, in a diverse cross-section of patients and providers.

We are implementing PROPS 2.0 across a variety of clinics at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, targeting enrolment of 5000 patients. Providers can refer patients or patients can self-refer. Eligible patients must be ≥20 years old and have a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m² or a BMI of 25–29.9 kg/m² plus another cardiovascular risk factor or obesity-related condition. After enrolment, patients register for the RestoreHealth online programme/app (HealthFleet Inc.) and participate for 12 months. Patients can engage with the programme and receive personalized feedback from a coach. Patient navigators help to enrol patients, enter updates in the electronic health record, and refer patients to additional resources. The RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework is guiding the evaluation.

The Mass General Brigham Human Research Committee approved this protocol. An implementation guide will be created and disseminated, to help other sites adopt the intervention in the future.

NCT0555925.

COVID-19 significantly impacted healthcare access and sexual behaviour, but little is known about how COVID-19 affected condom use. This study aimed to investigate whether self-reported condom use and sex in Washington State changed during pandemic restrictions compared with prepandemic.

Cross-sectional survey data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

Washington State.

11 684 participants aged 18–65.

The primary outcome was changes in the prevalence of condom use by time of interview pre-COVID-19, before the Washington State lockdown (1 January 2019 to 23 March 2020, n=7708) and during COVID-19, after the first state lockdown (24 March 2020 to 31 December 2020, n=3976). The secondary outcome was changes in the prevalence of reported sex during the same periods. We assessed whether associations differed by rurality and HIV risk behaviour.

Condom use was similar during COVID-19 (37.3%) compared with pre-COVID-19 (37.8%) (adjusted prevalence ratio (PR): 0.98, 95% CI 0.89, 1.01). Associations did not differ by rurality or HIV risk behaviour. Compared with pre-COVID-19 (83.0%), a smaller proportion of respondents reported having sex in the last 12 months during COVID-19 (80.5%), a relative decrease of 3% (PR: 0.97, 95% CI 0.96, 0.99; p

The prevalence of reported sex declined during COVID-19, but condom use remained steady in Washington. As our reproductive health system faces increased challenges, these results may inform future sexual health services.

Middle-aged multidomain risk reduction interventions targeting modifiable risk factors for dementia may delay or prevent a third of dementia cases in later life. We describe the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT), HAPPI MIND (Holistic Approach in Primary care for PreventIng Memory Impairment aNd Dementia). HAPPI MIND will evaluate the efficacy of a multidomain, nurse-led, mHealth supported intervention for assessing dementia risk and reducing associated risk factors in middle-aged adults in the Australian primary care setting.

General practice clinics (n≥26) across Victoria and New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised. Practice nurses will be trained to implement the HAPPI MIND intervention or a brief intervention. Patients of participating practices aged 45–65 years with ≥2 potential dementia risk factors will be identified and recruited (approximately 15 patients/clinic). Brief intervention participants receive a personalised report outlining their risk factors for dementia based on Australian National University Alzheimer’s Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI) scores, education booklet and referral to their general practitioner as appropriate. HAPPI MIND participants receive the brief intervention as well as six individualised dementia risk reduction sessions with a nurse trained in motivational interviewing and principles of behaviour change, a personalised risk reduction action plan and access to the purpose-built HAPPI MIND smartphone app for risk factor self-management. Follow-up data collection will occur at 12, 24 and 36 months. Primary outcome is ANU-ADRI score change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes include change in cognition, quality of life and individual risk factors of dementia.

Project approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 28273). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at healthcare conferences. If effective in reducing dementia risk, the HAPPI MIND intervention could be integrated into primary care, scaled up nationally and sustained over time.

ACTRN12621001168842.

To develop and validate the Oxford Needle Experience (ONE) scale, an instrument to assess needle fear, attitudes and expectations in the general population.

Cross-sectional validation study.

Internet-based with participants in the UK and USA.

UK and US representative samples stratified by age, sex, and ethnicity using the Prolific Academic platform.

Exploratory factor analysis with categorical variables and a polychoric correlation matrix followed by promax oblique rotation on the UK sample for the ONE scale. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with a Satorra-Bentler scaled test statistic evaluating the root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA), standardised root mean squared residual (SRMR) and comparative fit index (CFI) on the US sample. Reliability as internal consistency using McDonald’s omega. Convergent validity using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Predictive and discriminant validity using logistic regression ORs of association (OR).

The population included 1000 respondents, 500 in the UK and 500 in the USA. Minimum average partial correlation and a scree plot suggested four factors should be retained: injection hesitancy, blood-related hesitancy, recalled negative experiences and perceived benefits, yielding a 19-question scale. On CFA, the RMSEA was 0.070 (90% CI, 0.064 to 0.077), SRMR 0.053 and CFI 0.925. McDonald’s omega was 0.92 and 0.93 in the UK and US samples, respectively. Convergent validity with the four-item Oxford Coronavirus Explanations, Attitudes and Narratives Survey (OCEANS) needle fear scale demonstrated a strong correlation (r=0.83). Predictive validity with a single-question COVID-19 vaccination status question demonstrated a strong association, OR (95% CI) 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98), p

The ONE scale is a reliable and valid multidimensional scale that may be useful in predicting vaccine hesitancy, designing public health interventions to improve vaccine uptake and exploring alternatives to needles for medical procedures.

Certain criteria for ventilator-associated events (VAE) definition might influence the type of an event, its detection rate and consequently the resource expenditure in intensive care unit. The Impact of Infections by Antimicrobial-Resistant Microorganisms - Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (IMPACTO MR-PAV) aims to evaluate the incidence and diagnostic accuracy of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) using the current criteria for VAP surveillance in Brazil versus the VAE criteria defined by the US National Healthcare Safety Network-Center for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria.

The study will be conducted in around 15 centres across Brazil from October 2022 to December 2023. Trained healthcare professionals will collect data and compare the incidence of VAP using both the current criteria for VAP surveillance in Brazil and the VAE criteria defined by the CDC. The accuracy of the two criteria for identifying VAP will also be analysed. It will also characterise other events associated with mechanical ventilation (ventilator-associated condition, infection-related ventilator-associated complication) and adjudicate VAP reported to the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) using current epidemiological diagnostic criteria.

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board under the number 52354721.0.1001.0070. The study’s primary outcome measure will be the incidence of VAP using the two different surveillance criteria, and the secondary outcome measures will be the accuracy of the two criteria for identifying VAP and the adjudication of VAP reported to ANVISA. The results will contribute to the improvement of VAP surveillance in Brazil and may have implications for other countries that use similar criteria.

NCT05589727; Clinicaltrials.gov.

Drug–drug interactions (DDIs) are common and can result in patient harm. Electronic health records warn clinicians about DDIs via alerts, but the clinical decision support they provide is inadequate. Little is known about clinicians’ real-world DDI decision-making process to inform more effective alerts.

Apply cognitive task analysis techniques to determine informational cues used by clinicians to manage DDIs and identify opportunities to improve alerts.

Clinicians submitted incident forms involving DDIs, which were eligible for inclusion if there was potential for serious patient harm. For selected incidents, we met with the clinician for a 60 min interview. Each interview transcript was analysed to identify decision requirements and delineate clinicians’ decision-making process. We then performed an inductive, qualitative analysis across incidents.

Inpatient and outpatient care at a major, tertiary Veterans Affairs medical centre.

Physicians, pharmacists and nurse practitioners.

Themes to identify informational cues that clinicians used to manage DDIs.

We conducted qualitative analyses of 20 incidents. Data informed a descriptive model of clinicians’ decision-making process, consisting of four main steps: (1) detect a potential DDI; (2) DDI problem-solving, sensemaking and planning; (3) prescribing decision and (4) resolving actions. Within steps (1) and (2), we identified 19 information cues that clinicians used to manage DDIs for patients. These cues informed their subsequent decisions in steps (3) and (4). Our findings inform DDI alert recommendations to improve clinicians’ decision-making efficiency, confidence and effectiveness.

Our study provides three key contributions. Our study is the first to present an illustrative model of clinicians’ real-world decision making for managing DDIs. Second, our findings add to scientific knowledge by identifying 19 cognitive cues that clinicians rely on for DDI management in clinical practice. Third, our results provide essential, foundational knowledge to inform more robust DDI clinical decision support in the future.

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.

In older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), overtreatment with hypoglycaemic drugs (HDs: sulfonylureas, glinides and/or insulins) is frequent and associated with increased 1-year mortality. Deintensification of HD is thus a key issue, for which evidence is though limited. The primary objective of this study will be to estimate the effect of deintensifying HD on clinical outcomes (hospital admission or death) within 3 months in older adults (≥75 years) with T2D.

We will emulate with real-world data a target trial, within The Health Improvement Network cohort, a large-scale database of data collected from electronic medical records of 2000 general practitioners in France. From 1 January 2010 to 28 February 2019, we will include eligible patients ≥75 years who will have T2D, a stable dose of HDs, glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value 75 mmol/mol within 1 year. Participants will be followed from baseline to 12 months after randomisation, administrative censoring, or death, whichever occurs first. A pooled logistic regression will be used to estimate the treatment effect on the incidence of the outcomes.

No ethical approval is needed for using retrospectively this fully anonymised database. The results will be disseminated during conferences and through publications in scientific journals.

Breastfeeding has health benefits for infants and mothers, yet the UK has low rates with marked social inequalities. The Assets-based feeding help Before and After birth (ABA) feasibility study demonstrated the acceptability of a proactive, assets-based, woman-centred peer support intervention, inclusive of all feeding types, to mothers, peer supporters and maternity services. The ABA-feed study aims to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the ABA-feed intervention compared with usual care in first-time mothers in a full trial.

A multicentre randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation to explore clinical and cost-effectiveness, and embedded process evaluation to explore differences in implementation between sites. We aim to recruit 2730 primiparous women, regardless of feeding intention. Women will be recruited at 17 sites from antenatal clinics and various remote methods including social media and invitations from midwives and health visitors. Women will be randomised at a ratio of 1.43:1 to receive either ABA-feed intervention or usual care. A train the trainer model will be used to train local Infant Feeding Coordinators to train existing peer supporters to become ‘infant feeding helpers’ in the ABA-feed intervention. Infant feeding outcomes will be collected at 3 days, and 8, 16 and 24 weeks postbirth. The primary outcome will be any breastfeeding at 8 weeks postbirth. Secondary outcomes will include breastfeeding initiation, any and exclusive breastfeeding, formula feeding practices, anxiety, social support and healthcare utilisation. All analyses will be based on the intention-to-treat principle.

The study protocol has been approved by the East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee. Trial results will be available through open-access publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant meetings and conferences.

ISRCTN17395671.

Invasive non-typhoidal Salmonellosis (iNTS) is mainly caused by Salmonella enterica serovars Typhimurium and Enteritidis and is estimated to result in 77 500 deaths per year, disproportionately affecting children under 5 years of age in sub-Saharan Africa. Invasive non-typhoidal Salmonellae serovars are increasingly acquiring resistance to first-line antibiotics, thus an effective vaccine would be a valuable tool in reducing morbidity and mortality from infection. While NTS livestock vaccines are in wide use, no licensed vaccines exist for use in humans. Here, a first-in-human study of a novel vaccine (iNTS-GMMA) containing S. Typhimurium and S. Enteritidis Generalised Modules for Membrane Antigens (GMMA) outer membrane vesicles is presented.

The Salmonella Vaccine Study in Oxford is a randomised placebo-controlled participant-observer blind phase I study of the iNTS-GMMA vaccine. Healthy adult volunteers will be randomised to receive three intramuscular injections of the iNTS-GMMA vaccine, containing equal quantities of S. Typhimurium and S. Enteritidis GMMA particles adsorbed on Alhydrogel, or an Alhydrogel placebo at 0, 2 and 6 months. Participants will be sequentially enrolled into three groups: group 1, 1:1 randomisation to low dose iNTS-GMMA vaccine or placebo; group 2, 1:1 randomisation to full dose iNTS-GMMA vaccine or placebo; group 3, 2:1 randomisation to full dose or lower dose (dependant on DSMC reviews of groups 1 and 2) iNTS-GMMA vaccine or placebo.

The primary objective is safety and tolerability of the vaccine. The secondary objective is immunogenicity as measured by O-antigen based ELISA. Further exploratory objectives will characterise the expanded human immune profile.

Ethical approval for this study has been obtained from the South Central—Oxford A Research Ethics Committee (Ethics REF:22/SC/0059). Appropriate documentation and regulatory approvals have been acquired. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed articles and conferences.

EudraCT Number: 2020-000510-14.

To investigate whether intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) improves neurological outcomes in children with encephalitis when administered early in the illness.

Phase 3b multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Twenty-one hospitals in the UK.

Children aged 6 months to 16 years with a diagnosis of acute or subacute encephalitis, with a planned sample size of 308.

Two doses (1 g/kg/dose) of either IVIG or matching placebo given 24–36 hours apart, in addition to standard treatment.

The primary outcome was a ‘good recovery’ at 12 months after randomisation, defined as a score of≤2 on the Paediatric Glasgow Outcome Score Extended.

The secondary outcomes were clinical, neurological, neuroimaging and neuropsychological results, identification of the proportion of children with immune-mediated encephalitis, and IVIG safety data.

18 participants were recruited from 12 hospitals and randomised to receive either IVIG (n=10) or placebo (n=8) between 23 December 2015 and 26 September 2017. The study was terminated early following withdrawal of funding due to slower than anticipated recruitment, and therefore did not reach the predetermined sample size required to achieve the primary study objective; thus, the results are descriptive. At 12 months after randomisation, 9 of the 18 participants (IVIG n=5/10 (50%), placebo n=4/8 (50%)) made a good recovery and 5 participants (IVIG n=3/10 (30%), placebo n=2/8 (25%)) made a poor recovery. Three participants (IVIG n=1/10 (10%), placebo n=2/8 (25%)) had a new diagnosis of epilepsy during the study period. Two participants were found to have specific autoantibodies associated with autoimmune encephalitis. No serious adverse events were reported in participants receiving IVIG.

The IgNiTE (ImmunoglobuliN in the Treatment of Encephalitis) study findings support existing evidence of poor neurological outcomes in children with encephalitis. However, the study was halted prematurely and was therefore underpowered to evaluate the effect of early IVIG treatment compared with placebo in childhood encephalitis.

Clinical Trials.gov NCT02308982; ICRCTN registry ISRCTN15791925.

Current treatment decision-making in high-grade soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) care is not informed by individualised risks for different treatment options and patients’ preferences. Risk prediction tools may provide patients and professionals insight in personalised risks and benefits for different treatment options and thereby potentially increase patients’ knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. The VALUE-PERSARC study aims to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of a personalised risk assessment tool (PERSARC) to increase patients’ knowledge about risks and benefits of treatment options and to reduce decisional conflict in comparison with usual care in high-grade extremity STS patients.

The VALUE-PERSARC study is a parallel cluster randomised control trial that aims to include at least 120 primarily diagnosed high-grade extremity STS patients in 6 Dutch hospitals. Eligible patients (≥18 years) are those without a treatment plan and treated with curative intent. Patients with sarcoma subtypes or treatment options not mentioned in PERSARC are unable to participate. Hospitals will be randomised between usual care (control) or care with the use of PERSARC (intervention). In the intervention condition, PERSARC will be used by STS professionals in multidisciplinary tumour boards to guide treatment advice and in patient consultations, where the oncological/orthopaedic surgeon informs the patient about his/her diagnosis and discusses benefits and harms of all relevant treatment options. The primary outcomes are patients’ knowledge about risks and benefits of treatment options and decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale) 1 week after the treatment decision has been made. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using questionnaires, 1 week and 3, 6 and 12 months after the treatment decision. Data will be analysed following an intention-to-treat approach using a linear mixed model and taking into account clustering of patients within hospitals.

The Medical Ethical Committee Leiden-Den Haag-Delft (METC-LDD) approved this protocol (NL76563.058.21). The results of this study will be reported in a peer-review journal.

NL9160, NCT05741944.

In population-based research, disease ascertainment algorithms can be as accurate as, and less costly than, performing supplementary clinical examinations on selected participants to confirm a diagnosis of a neurocognitive disorder (NCD), but they require cohort-specific validation. To optimise the use of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) to understand the epidemiology and burden of NCDs, the CLSA Memory Study will validate an NCD ascertainment algorithm to identify CLSA participants with these disorders using routinely acquired study data.

Up to 600 CLSA participants with equal numbers of those likely to have no NCD, mild NCD or major NCD based on prior self-reported physician diagnosis of a memory problem or dementia, medication consumption (ie, cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine) and/or self-reported function will be recruited during the follow-up 3 CLSA evaluations (started August 2021). Participants will undergo an assessment by a study clinician who will also review an informant interview and make a preliminary determination of the presence or absence of an NCD. The clinical assessment and available CLSA data will be reviewed by a Central Review Panel who will make a final categorisation of participants as having (1) no NCD, (2) mild NCD or, (3) major NCD (according to fifth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria). These will be used as our gold standard diagnosis to determine if the NCD ascertainment algorithm accurately identifies CLSA participants with an NCD. Weighted Kappa statistics will be the primary measure of agreement. Sensitivity, specificity, the C-statistic and the phi coefficient will also be estimated.

Ethics approval has been received from the institutional research ethics boards for each CLSA Data Collection Site (Université de Sherbrooke, Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia Health Research Ethics Board, University of Manitoba, McGill University, McGill University Health Centre Research Institute, Memorial University of Newfoundland, University of Victoria, Élisabeth Bruyère Research Institute of Ottawa, University of British Columbia, Island Health (Formerly the Vancouver Island Health Authority, Simon Fraser University, Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board).

The results of this work will be disseminated to public health professionals, researchers, health professionals, administrators and policy-makers through journal publications, conference presentations, publicly available reports and presentations to stakeholder groups.