The current U-BIRTH cohort (Uppsala Birth Cohort) extends our previous cohort Biology, Affect, Stress, Imaging and Cognition (BASIC), assessing the development of children up to 11 years after birth. The U-BIRTH study aims to (1) assess the impact of exposure to peripartum mental illness on the children’s development taking into account biological and environmental factors during intrauterine life and childhood; (2) identify early predictors of child neurodevelopmental and psychological problems using biophysiological, psychosocial and environmental variables available during pregnancy and early post partum.

All mothers participating in the previous BASIC cohort are invited, and mother–child dyads recruited in the U-BIRTH study are consecutively invited to questionnaire assessments and biological sampling when the child is 18 months, 6 years and 11 years old. Data collection at 18 months (n=2882) has been completed. Consent for participation has been obtained from 1946 families of children having reached age 6 and from 698 families of children having reached age 11 years.

Based on the complete data from pregnancy to 18 months post partum, peripartum mental health was significantly associated with the development of attentional control and gaze-following behaviours, which are critical to cognitive and social learning later in life. Moreover, infants of depressed mothers had an elevated risk of difficult temperament and behavioural problems compared with infants of non-depressed mothers. Analyses of biological samples showed that peripartum depression and anxiety were related to DNA methylation differences in infants. However, there were no methylation differences in relation to infants’ behavioural problems at 18 months of age.

Given that the data collection at 18 months is complete, analyses are now being undertaken. Currently, assessments for children reaching 6 and 11 years are ongoing.

In this study, we used the information generated by community members during an intervention design process to understand the features needed for a successful community participatory intervention to improve child health.

We conducted a concurrent mixed-methods study (November 2019–March 2020) to inform the design and evaluation of a community–facility linkage participatory intervention.

Kiyawa Local Government Area (Jigawa State, Nigeria)—population of 230 000 (n=425 villages).

Qualitative data included 12 community conversations with caregivers of children under-5 (men, older and younger women; n=9 per group), 3 focus group discussions (n=10) with ward development committee members and interviews with facility heads (n=3). Quantitative data comprised household surveys (n=3464) with compound heads (n=1803) and women (n=1661).

We analysed qualitative data with thematic network analysis and the surveys with linear regression—results were triangulated in the interpretation phase. Participants identified the following areas of focus: community health education; facility infrastructure, equipment and staff improvements; raising funds to make these changes. Community involvement, cooperation and empowerment were recognised as a strategy to improve child health, and the presence of intermediate bodies (development committees) was deemed important to improve communication and solve problems between community and facility members. The survey showed functional community relations’ dynamics, with high levels of internal cohesion (78%), efficacy in solving problems together (79%) and fairness of the local leaders (82%).

Combining the results from this study and critical theories on successful participation identified community-informed features for a contextually tailored community–facility link intervention. The need to promote a more inclusive approach to future child health interventions was highlighted. In addition to health education campaigns, the relationship between community and healthcare providers needs strengthening, and development committees were identified as an essential feature for successfully linking communities and facilities for child health.

ISRCTN39213655.

Little research exists on how risk scores are used in counselling. We examined (a) how Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT) scores are presented during counselling; (b) how women react and (c) discuss them afterwards.

Consultations were video-recorded and participants were interviewed after the consultation as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1 (NSABP DMP-1).

Two NSABP DMP-1 breast cancer care centres in the USA: one large comprehensive cancer centre serving a high-risk population and an academic safety-net medical centre in an urban setting.

Thirty women evaluated for breast cancer risk and their counselling providers were included.

Participants who were identified as at increased risk of breast cancer were recruited to participate in qualitative study with a video-recorded consultation and subsequent semi-structured interview that included giving feedback and input after viewing their own consultation. Consultation videos were summarised jointly and inductively as a team.tThe interview material was searched deductively for text segments that contained the inductively derived themes related to risk assessment. Subgroup analysis according to demographic variables such as age and Gail score were conducted, investigating reactions to risk scores and contrasting and comparing them with the pertinent video analysis data. From this, four descriptive categories of reactions to risk scores emerged. The descriptive categories were clearly defined after 19 interviews; all 30 interviews fit principally into one of the four descriptive categories.

Risk scores were individualised and given meaning by providers through: (a) presenting thresholds, (b) making comparisons and (c) emphasising or minimising the calculated risk. The risk score information elicited little reaction from participants during consultations, though some added to, agreed with or qualified the provider’s information. During interviews, participants reacted to the numbers in four primary ways: (a) engaging easily with numbers; (b) expressing greater anxiety after discussing the risk score; (c) accepting the risk score and (d) not talking about the risk score.

Our study highlights the necessity that patients’ experiences must be understood and put into relation to risk assessment information to become a meaningful treatment decision-making tool, for instance by categorising patients’ information engagement into types.

NCT01399359.

The epidemiological and demographic transitions are leading to a rising burden of multimorbidity (co-occurrence of two or more chronic conditions) worldwide. Evidence on the burden, determinants, consequences and care of multimorbidity in rural and urbanising India is limited, partly due to a lack of longitudinal and objectively measured data on chronic health conditions. We will conduct a mixed-methods study nested in the prospective Andhra Pradesh Children and Parents’ Study (APCAPS) cohort to develop a data resource for understanding the epidemiology of multimorbidity in rural and urbanising India and developing interventions to improve the prevention and care of multimorbidity.

We aim to recruit 2100 APCAPS cohort members aged 45+ who have clinical and lifestyle data collected during a previous cohort follow-up (2010–2012). We will screen for locally prevalent non-communicable, infectious and mental health conditions, alongside cognitive impairments, disabilities and frailty, using a combination of self-reported clinical diagnosis, symptom-based questionnaires, physical examinations and biochemical assays. We will conduct in-depth interviews with people with varying multimorbidity clusters, their informal carers and local healthcare providers. Deidentified data will be made available to external researchers.

The study has received approval from the ethics committees of the National Institute of Nutrition and Indian Institute of Public Health Hyderabad, India and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK. Meta-data and data collection instruments will be published on the APCAPS website alongside details of existing APCAPS data and the data access process (www.lshtm.ac.uk/research/centres-projects-groups/apcaps).

The Finnish Retirement and Aging (FIREA) Study was set up to study changes in health behavioural and cardiometabolic risk factors across retirement transition, and to examine the long-term consequences of work and retirement on health and functioning with advancing age.

Public sector workers whose estimated statutory retirement date was in 2014–2019 were invited to participate by sending them a questionnaire 18 months prior to their estimated retirement date. In the first phase of the FIREA Study, participants were followed up with annual surveys, accelerometer and clinical measurements during retirement transition into post-retirement years. The FIREA survey cohort includes 6783 participants, of which 908 belong also to the activity substudy and 290 to the clinical substudy.

Collected data include survey measures about health, lifestyle factors, psychosocial distress, work-related factors as well as retirement intentions. Accelerometer and GPS devices are used to measure 24-hour movement behaviours. Clinical examination includes blood and hair sample, measurements of anthropometry, cardiovascular function, physical fitness, physical and cognitive function. Our results suggest that in general retirement transition seems to have beneficial influence on health behaviours as well as on physical and mental health, but there are large individual differences, and certain behaviours such as sedentariness tend to increase especially among those retiring from manual occupations.

The second phase of the FIREA Study will be conducted during 2023–2025, when participants are 70 years old. The FIREA Study welcomes research collaboration proposals that fall within the general aims of the project.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, most essential services experienced some level of disruption. Disruption in LMICs was more severe than in HICs. Early reports suggested that services for maternal and newborn health were disproportionately affected, raising concerns about health equity. Most disruption indicators measure demand-side disruption, or they conflate demand-side and supply-side disruption. There is currently no published guidance on measuring supply-side disruption. The primary objective of this review was to identify methods and approaches used to measure supply-side service disruptions to maternal and newborn health services in the context of COVID-19.

We carried out a systematic review and have created a typology of measurement methods and approaches using narrative synthesis.

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Global Health in January 2023. We also searched the grey literature.

We included empirical studies describing the measurement of supply-side service disruption of maternal and newborn health services in LMICs in the context of COVID-19.

We extracted the aim, method(s), setting, and study outcome(s) from included studies. We synthesised findings by type of measure (ie, provision or quality of services) and methodological approach (ie, qualitative or quantitative).

We identified 28 studies describing 5 approaches to measuring supply-side disruption: (1) cross-sectional surveys of the nature and experience of supply-side disruption, (2) surveys to measure temporal changes in service provision or quality, (3) surveys to create composite disruption scores, (4) surveys of service users to measure receipt of services, and (5) clinical observation of the provision and quality of services.

Our review identified methods and approaches for measuring supply-side service disruption of maternal and newborn health services. These indicators provide important information about the causes and extent of supply-side disruption and provide a useful starting point for developing specific guidance on the measurement of service disruption in LMICs.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects 5%–10% of paediatric population and is reportedly more common in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D), exacerbating its clinical course. Proper treatment of ADHD in such patients may thus provide neurological and metabolic benefits. To test this, we designed a non-commercial second phase clinical trial comparing the impact of different pharmacological interventions for ADHD in children with T1D.

This is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, cross-over clinical trial in children and adolescents with ADHD and T1D. The trial will be conducted in four reference paediatric diabetes centres in Poland. Over 36 months, eligible patients with both T1D and ADHD (aged 8–16.5 years, T1D duration >1 year) will be offered participation. Patients’ guardians will undergo online once-weekly training sessions behaviour management for 10 weeks. Afterward, children will be randomised to methylphenidate (long-release capsule, doses 18-36-54 mg) versus lisdexamphetamine (LDX, 30-50-70 mg). Pharmacotherapy will continue for 6 months before switching to alternative medication. Throughout the trial, the participants will be evaluated every 3 months by their diabetologist and online psychological assessments. The primary endpoint (ADHD symptom severity, Conners 3.0 questionnaire) will be assessed by a blinded investigator. Secondary endpoints will include HbA1c, continuous glucose monitoring indices and quality-of-life (PedsQL).

The trial is approved by Bioethical Committee at Medical University of Lodz and Polish regulatory agency (RNN/142/22/KE, UR/DBL/D/263/2022). The results will be communicated to the research and clinical community, and Polish agencies responsible for healthcare policy. Patient organisations focused on paediatric T1D will be notified by a consortium member. We hope to use the trial’s results to promote collaboration between mental health professionals and diabetes teams, evaluate the economic feasibility of using LDX in patients with both diseases and the long run improve ADHD treatment in children with T1D.

EU Clinical Trials Register (EU-CTR, 2022-001906-24) and NCT05957055.

Faith-based organisations (FBOs) and religious actors increase vaccine confidence and uptake among ethnoracially minoritised communities in low-income and middle-income countries. During the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent vaccine rollout, global organisations such as the WHO and UNICEF called for faith-based collaborations with public health agencies (PHAs). As PHA-FBO partnerships emerge to support vaccine uptake, the scoping review aims to: (1) outline intervention typologies and implementation frameworks guiding interventions; (2) describe the roles of PHAs and FBOs in the design, implementation and evaluation of strategies and (3) synthesise outcomes and evaluations of PHA-FBO vaccine uptake initiatives for ethnoracially minoritised communities.

We will perform six library database searches in PROQUEST-Public Health, OVID MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, SCOPUS- all, PROQUEST - Policy File index; three theses repositories, four website searches, five niche journals and 11 document repositories for public health. These databases will be searched for literature that describe partnerships for vaccine confidence and uptake for ethnoracially minoritised populations, involving at least one PHA and one FBO, published in English from January 2011 to October 2023. Two reviewers will pilot-test 20 articles to refine and finalise the inclusion/exclusion criteria and data extraction template. Four reviewers will independently screen and extract the included full-text articles. An implementation science process framework outlining the design, implementation and evaluation of the interventions will be used to capture the array of partnerships and effectiveness of PHA-FBO vaccine uptake initiatives.

This multiphase Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) project received ethics approval from the University of Toronto. Findings will be translated into a series of written materials for dissemination to CIHR, and collaborating knowledge users (ie, regional and provincial PHAs), and panel presentations at conferences to inform the development of a best-practices framework for increasing vaccine confidence and uptake.

Inappropriate use of antibiotics is a major driver of antibiotic resistance. A few studies conducted in Africa have documented that about half of hospitalised patients who receive antibiotics should not have received them. A few hospital-based studies that have been conducted in Sierra Leone have documented a high usage of antibiotics in hospitals. Therefore, we conducted a nationwide point prevalence survey on antibiotic use among hospitalised patients in Sierra Leone.

We conducted a hospital-based, cross-sectional survey on the use of antibiotics using the WHO point prevalence survey methodology.

The study was conducted in 26 public and private hospitals that are providing inpatient healthcare services.

All patients admitted to paediatric and adult inpatient wards before or at 08:00 on the survey date were enrolled.

Prevalence of antibiotic use, antibiotics Access, Watch and Reserve (AWaRe) categorisation, indication for antibiotic use prevalence and proportion of bacteria culture done.

Of the 1198 patient records reviewed, 883 (73.7%, 95% CI 71.1% to 76.2%) were on antibiotics. Antibiotic use was highest in the paediatric wards (306, 85.7%), followed by medical wards (158, 71.2%), surgical wards (146, 69.5%), mixed wards (97, 68.8%) and lowest in the obstetrics and gynaecology wards (176, 65.7%). The most widely prescribed antibiotics were metronidazole (404, 22.2%), ceftriaxone (373, 20.5%), ampicillin (337, 18.5%), gentamicin (221, 12.1%) and amoxicillin (90, 5.0%). Blood culture was only done for one patient and antibiotic treatments were given empirically. The most common indication for antibiotic use was community-acquired infection (484, 51.9%) followed by surgical prophylaxis (222, 23.8%).

There was high usage of antibiotics in hospitals in Sierra Leone as the majority of patients admitted received an antibiotic. This has the potential to increase the burden of antibiotic resistance in the country. We, therefore, recommend the establishment of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programmes according to the WHO core components.