Effectiveness of a web-based intervention to prevent anxiety in the children of parents with anxiety:Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Anxiety is the most common childhood mental health condition and is associated with impaired child outcomes, including increased risk of mental health difficulties in adulthood. Anxiety runs in families: when a parent has anxiety, their child has a 50% higher chance of developing it themselves. Environmental factors are predominant in the intergenerational transmission of anxiety and, of these, parenting processes play a major role. Interventions that target parents to support them to limit the impact of any anxiogenic parenting behaviors are associated with reduced anxiety in their children. A brief UK-based group intervention delivered to parents within the UK National Health Service led to a 16% reduction in children meeting the criteria for an anxiety disorder. However, this intervention is not widely accessible. To widen access, a 9-module web-based version of this intervention has been developed. This course comprises psychoeducation and home practice delivered through text, video, animations, and practice tasks. OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to evaluate the feasibility of delivering this web-based intervention and assess its effectiveness in reducing child anxiety symptoms. METHODS:  This is the protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a community sample of 1754 parents with self-identified high levels of anxiety with a child aged 2-11 years. Parents in the intervention arm will receive access to the web-based course, which they undertake at a self-determined rate. The control arm receives no intervention. Follow-up data collection is at months 6 and months 9-21. Intention-to-treat analysis will be conducted on outcomes including child anxiety, child mental health symptoms, and well-being; parental anxiety and well-being; and parenting behaviors. RESULTS: Funding was received in April 2020, and recruitment started in February 2021 and is projected to end in October 2022. A total of 1350 participants have been recruited as of May 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this RCT will provide evidence on the utility of a web-based course in preventing intergenerational transmission of anxiety and increase the understanding of familial anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04755933; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04755933 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/4070

Co-producing principles to guide health research: an illustrative case study from an eating disorder research clinic

There is significant value in co-produced health research, however power-imbalances within research teams can pose a barrier to people with lived experience of an illness determining the direction of research in that area. This is especially true in eating disorder research, where the inclusion of co-production approaches lags other research areas. Appealing to principles or values can serve to ground collaborative working. Despite this, there has not been any prior attempt to co-produce principles to guide the work of a research group and serve as a basis for developing future projects. The aim of this piece of work was to co-produce a set of principles to guide the conduct of research within our lived experience led research clinic, and to offer an illustrative case for the value of this as a novel co-production methodology. A lived experience panel were recruited to our eating disorder research group. Through an iterative series of workshops with the members of our research clinic (composed of a lived experience panel, clinicians, and researchers) we developed a set of principles which we agreed were important in ensuring both the direction of our research, and the way in which we wanted to work together. Six key principles were developed using this process. They were that research should aim to be: 1) real world—offering a clear and concrete benefit to people with eating disorders, 2) tailored—suitable for marginalised groups and people with atypical diagnoses, 3) hopeful—ensuring that hope for recovery was centred in treatment, 4) experiential—privileging the ‘voice’ of people with eating disorders, 5) broad—encompassing non-standard therapeutic treatments and 6) democratic—co-produced by people with lived experience of eating disorders. We reflect on some of the positives as well as limitations of the process, highlighting the importance of adequate funding for longer-term co-production approaches to be taken, and issues around ensuring representation of minority groups. We hope that other health research groups will see the value in co-producing principles to guide research in their own fields, and will adapt, develop, and refine this novel methodology