Conectar
by Megan Wiggins, Marie Varughese, Ellen Rafferty, Sasha van Katwyk, Christopher McCabe, Jeff Round, Erin Kirwin
BackgroundDuring public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, decision-makers relied on infectious disease models to evaluate policy options. Often, there is a high degree of uncertainty in the evidence base underpinning these models. When there is increased uncertainty, the risk of selecting a policy option that does not align with the intended policy objective also increases; we term this decision risk. Even when models adequately capture uncertainty, the tools used to communicate their outcomes, underlying uncertainty, and associated decision risk have often been insufficient. Our aim is to support infectious disease modellers and decision-makers in interpreting and communicating decision risk when evaluating multiple policy options.
MethodsWe developed the Decision Uncertainty Toolkit by adapting methods from health economics and infectious disease modelling to improve the interpretation and communication of uncertainty. Specifically, we developed a quantitative measure of decision risk as well as a suite of risk visualizations. We refined the toolkit contents based on feedback from early dissemination through conferences and workshops.
ResultsThe Decision Uncertainty Toolkit: (i) adapts and extends existing health economics methods for characterization, estimation, and communication of uncertainty to infectious disease modelling, (ii) introduces a novel risk measure that quantitatively captures the downside risk of policy alternatives, (iii) provides visual outputs for dissemination and communication of uncertainty and decision risk, and (iv) includes instructions on how to use the toolkit, standard text descriptions and examples for each component. The use of the toolkit is demonstrated through a hypothetical example.
ConclusionThe Decision Uncertainty Toolkit improves existing methods for communicating infectious disease model results by providing additional information regarding uncertainty and decision risk associated with policy alternatives. This empowers decision-makers to consider and evaluate decision risk more effectively when making policy decisions. Improved understanding of decision risk can improve outcomes in future public health crises.
Thousands of patients with mental illness are admitted to acute adult mental health wards every year in England, where local guidance recommends that all mental health settings be entirely smokefree. Mental health Trusts presently invest substantial effort and resources to implement smoke-free policies and to deliver tobacco dependence treatment to patients. Providing adequate support can help those who smoke remain abstinent or quit smoking during their smoke-free inpatient stay and beyond. At present, little is known about how best to support patients to prevent their return to pre-admission smoking behaviours after discharge from a smoke-free mental health inpatient stay. We have developed an intervention which includes targeted resources to support smoking-related behaviour change in patients following discharge from a smoke-free mental health setting. The aim of this trial is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale clinical trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SCEPTRE intervention, compared with usual care.
This feasibility study will be an individually randomised, controlled trial in eight National Health Service mental health Trusts recruiting adults (≥18 years) admitted to an acute adult mental health inpatient setting who smoke tobacco on admission, or at any point during their inpatient stay. Consenting participants will be randomised to receive a 12-week intervention consisting of components aimed at promoting or maintaining positive smoking-related behaviour change following discharge from a smoke-free mental health inpatient setting or usual care. Data will be collected at baseline, 3 months and a second timepoint between 4 and 6 months post-randomisation. With 64 participants (32 in each group), the trial will allow a participation rate of 15% and completion rate of 80% to be estimated within a 95% CI of ±3% and ±10%, respectively. The analysis will be descriptive and follow a prespecified plan.
Ethics approval was obtained from the North West—Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee. We will share results widely through local, national and international academic, clinical and patient and public involvement networks. The results will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed journals and will be published on the trial website: https://sceptreresearch.com/.
FreshRSS