An assessment of the extent to which the contents of PROSPERO records meet the systematic review protocol reporting items in PRISMA-P [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Introduction PROSPERO is an international prospective register for systematic review protocols. Many of the registrations are the only available source of information about planned methods. This study investigated the extent to which records in PROSPERO contained the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P). Methods A random sample of 439 single entry PROSPERO records of reviews of health interventions registered in 2018 was identified. Using a piloted list of 19 PRISMA-P items, divided into 63 elements, two researchers independently assessed the registration records. Where the information was present or not applicable to the review a score of 1 was assigned. Overall scores were calculated and comparisons made by stage of review at registration, whether or not a meta-analysis was planned and whether or not funding/sponsorship was reported. Results Some key methodological details such as eligibility criteria, were relatively frequently reported, but much of the information recommended in PRISMA-P was not stated in PROSPERO registrations. Considering the 19 items, the mean score was 4.8 (SD 1.8; median 4; range 2-11) and across all the assessed records only 25% (2081/8227) of the items were scored as reported. Considering the 63 elements, the mean score was 33.4 (SD 5.8; median 33; range 18-47) and overall, 53% (14,469/27,279) of the elements were assessed as reported. Reporting was more frequent for items required in PROSPERO than optional items. The planned comparisons showed no meaningful differences between groups. Conclusions PROSPERO provides reviewers with the opportunity to be transparent in their planned methods and demonstrate efforts to reduce bias. However, where the PROSPERO record is the only available source of a priori reporting, there is a significant shortfall in the items reported, compared to those recommended. This presents challenges in interpretation for those wishing to assess the validity of the final review

Identification of depression in women during pregnancy and the early postnatal period using the Whooley questions and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale : protocol for the Born and Bred in Yorkshire: PeriNatal Depression Diagnostic Accuracy (BaBY PaNDA) study

INTRODUCTION: Perinatal depression is well recognised as a mental health condition but <50% of cases are identified by healthcare professionals in routine clinical practice. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is often used to detect symptoms of postnatal depression in maternity and child services. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends 2 'ultra-brief' case-finding questions (the Whooley questions) to aid identification of depression during the perinatal period, but this recommendation was made in the absence of any validation studies in a perinatal population. Limited research exists on the acceptability of these depression case-finding instruments and the cost-effectiveness of routine screening for perinatal depression. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The diagnostic accuracy of the Whooley questions and the EPDS will be determined against a reference standard (the Client Interview Schedule-Revised) during pregnancy (around 20 weeks) and the early postnatal period (around 3-4 months post partum) in a sample of 379 women. Further outcome measures will assess a range of psychological comorbidities, health-related quality of life and resource utilisation. Women will be followed up 12 months postnatally. The sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the Whooley questions and the EPDS will be calculated against the reference standard at 20 weeks pregnancy and 3-4 months post partum. Acceptability of the depression case-finding instruments to women and healthcare professionals will involve in-depth qualitative interviews. An existing decision analytic model will be adapted to determine the cost-effectiveness of routine screening for perinatal depression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is considered low risk for participants. Robust protocols will deal with cases where risk of depression, self-harm or suicide is identified. The protocol received favourable ethical opinion from the North East-York Research Ethics Committee (reference: 11/NE/0022). The study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences

Interventions to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour in severe mental ill health: How effective are they?’- A systematic review.

Background People with severe mental ill health experience a mortality gap of 15–20 years and one of the main reasons for this is due to preventable physical health conditions. Physical activity can reduce the risk of developing physical health conditions such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease yet people with severe mental ill health are less physically active and more sedentary than the general population. Methods A systematic review was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviour in people with severe mental ill health. The protocol was published with PROSPERO (CRD42021277579). Randomised controlled trials conducted in any country in any setting and published in English with an aim of increasing physical activity or reducing sedentary behaviour were included. Results Eleven unique studies were identified for inclusion. Due to the variability between interventions, outcome measures, and time points, it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis. Effect estimates suggested that three of the interventions were effective at increasing physical activity. However, the certainty of the evidence was rated as low using the GRADE approach. Conclusions The evidence on interventions to increase activity shows promise but is insufficiently robust for an intervention to be recommended in clinical guidelines. More high-quality and statistically powered trials are needed to guide best practice and policy

The RESPECT study: a feasibility randomised controlled trial of a sexual health promotion intervention for people with serious mental illness in community mental health services in the UK

BackgroundPeople with serious mental illness (SMI) have sexual health needs but there is little evidence to inform effective interventions to address them. In fact, there are few studies that have addressed this topic for people with SMI outside USA and Brazil. Therefore, the aim of the study was to establish the acceptability and feasibility of a trial of a sexual health promotion intervention for people with SMI in the UK.MethodThe RESPECT study was a two-armed randomised controlled, open feasibility trial (RCT) comparing Sexual health promotion intervention (3 individual sessions of 1 h) (I) or treatment as usual (TAU) for adults aged 18 or over, with SMI, within community mental health services in four UK cities. The main outcome of interest was the percentage who consented to participate, and retained in each arm of the trial, retention for the intervention, and completeness of data collection. A nested qualitative study obtained the views of participants regarding the acceptability of the study using individual telephone interviews conducted by lived experience researchers.ResultsOf a target sample of 100, a total of 72 people were enrolled in the trial over 12 months. Recruitment in the initial months was low and so an extension was granted. However this extension meant that the later recruited participants would only be followed up to the 3 month point. There was good retention in the intervention and the study as a whole; 77.8% of those allocated to intervention (n = 28) received it. At three months, 81.9% (30 I; 29 TAU) and at 6 months, 76.3% (13 I and 16 TAU) completed the follow-up data collection. No adverse events were reported. There was good completeness of the data. The sexual health outcomes for the intervention group changed in favour of the intervention. Based on analysis of the qualitative interviews, the methods of recruitment, the quality of the participant information, the data collection, and the intervention were deemed to be acceptable to the participants (n = 22).ConclusionsThe target of 100 participants was not achieved within the study’s timescale. However, effective strategies were identified that improved recruitment in the final few months. Retention rates and completeness of data in both groups indicate that it is acceptable and feasible to undertake a study promoting sexual health for people with SMI. A fully powered RCT is required to establish effectiveness of the intervention in adoption of safer sex.Study registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15747739 prospectively registered 5th July 2016

Erratum to: CASPER plus (CollAborative care in screen-positive EldeRs with major depressive disorder): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Published onlinePUBLISHED ERRATUMThe original article is available at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/18985.n/

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Dupuytren’s Interventions Surgery versus Collagenase (DISC) Trial : Study Protocol for a pragmatic, two arm parallel group, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

Background: Dupuytren’s contracture is a fibro-proliferative disease of the hands affecting over 2 million UK adults, particularly the white, male population. Surgery is the traditional treatment, however recent studies have indicated that an alternative to surgery - Collagenase Clostridium Histolyticum (Collagenase) - is better than placebo in the treatment of Dupuytren’s contracture. There is however no robust randomised controlled trial that provides a definitive answer on the clinical effectiveness of Collagenase compared with limited fasciectomy surgery. The Dupuytren’s Interventions Surgery vs Collagenase Trial (DISC) Trial was therefore designed to fill this evidence gap. Methods/Design: The DISC Trial is a multi-centre pragmatic two arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial. Participants will be assigned 1:1 to receive either Collagenase injection or surgery (limited fasciectomy). We aim to recruit 710 adult participants with Dupuytren’s contracture. Potential participants will be identified in primary and secondary care, screened by a delegated clinician and if eligible and consenting, baseline data will be collected and randomisation completed. The primary outcome will be the self-reported Patient Evaluation Measure assessed at 1 year after treatment. Secondary outcome measures include the Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main Scale, the Michigan Hand Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L, resource use, further procedures, complications, recurrence, total active movement and extension deficit, and time to return to function. Given the limited evidence comparing recurrence rates following Collagenase injection and limited fasciectomy, and the importance of a return to function as soon as possible for patients, the associated measures for each will be prioritised to allow treatment effectiveness in the context of these key elements to be assessed. An economic evaluation will assess the cost effectiveness of treatments and a qualitative sub-study will assess participants experiences and preferences of the treatments. Discussion: The DISC trial is the first randomised controlled trial, to our knowledge, to investigate the clinical and cost effectiveness of Collagenase compared to limited fasciectomy surgery for patients with Dupuytren’s contracture. ISRCTN registry identifier: ISRCTN18254597. Prospectively registered on 11th April 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18254597 Keywords: Dupuytren’s contracture, Collagenase clostridium histolyticum, limited fasciectomy, surgery, correction, randomised controlled tria

Community pharmacies mood intervention Study (CHEMIST) Feasibility and External Pilot randomised controlled trial protocol

Feasibility study: Objectives:Refine a bespoke enhanced support intervention (ESI) (including self-help materials, intervention manual and training) for implementation by community pharmacy (CP) staff to people with sub-threshold depression and long-term conditions (LTCs) based upon evidence-supported interventions in primary careDevelop and refine study procedures (recruitment strategies and set up, screening, participant recruitment, assessment, suitability of outcome measures and data collection procedures) for testing in the pilot study phaseDesign: A case series/qualitative studySetting: UK community pharmacyPopulation: Adults with long-term health conditions who screen-positive for depression but who do not reach the threshold for DSM IV Moderate Depressive disorderIntervention: Enhanced support intervention (ESI) delivered by an appropriately trained community pharmacy team member involving four to six sessions over four months. ESI is a modified form of an intervention within the collaborative care framework for sub-threshold depression validated in previous studies in UK primary care which appears suitable for implementation in community settings.Sample size: 20-30 participantsOutcomes: Study implementation (recruitment and attrition rates), quality of data collection at baseline and 4 months and ESI adherence (number of contacts, DNA and drop out) as per objectives 1a/bQualitative evaluation: Semi-structured interviews with up to 10 participants and ESI facilitators and focus group(s) (range of pharmacy staff n = 8-10) will be conducted to explore the acceptability of the intervention and feasibility of the study, training and study procedures. External pilot study: Objectives:Quantify the flow of participants (eligibility, recruitment and follow-up rate)Evaluate proposed recruitment, assessment and outcome measure collection methodsExamine the delivery of the enhanced support intervention in a community pharmacy setting (intervention uptake, retention and dose) to inform process evaluationProcess evaluation, using semi-structured interviews with participants across a range of socio-economic settings, and pharmacy staff to explore the acceptability of the ESI within community pharmacy, elements of the intervention that were considered useful (or not) and appropriateness of study proceduresDesign: Pilot randomised controlled trial, including a prospective economic and qualitative evaluationSetting: As abovePopulation: As aboveIntervention: As above with adaptations post feasibility studyComparator: Usual careSample size: 100 participantsOutcomes: Data will be used to estimate recruitment, intervention delivery and study completion rates as per objectives 2a-d. Definitive estimates of the effectiveness of ESI will not be made.Primary outcome: Depression severity (Patient Health Questionnaire 9) at four months.Secondary outcomes: Patient acceptance, uptake and attrition. ICD10 depression status, anxiety (GAD 7), health-related quality of life (SF-12v2) and health-state utility (EQ5D 3L) will be measured at four months.Economic evaluation: The incremental cost per QALY will be calculated from both the NHS and societal perspective.Process evaluation: Using mixed methods, potential mediators/moderators of the intervention, the acceptability (to participants and pharmacy staff), barriers and facilitators to the use of ESI in community pharmacy, and impact on usual practice will be examined. Semi-structured interviews with approximately 30 study participants, 20 pharmacy staff and eight GPs near participating pharmacies will be conducted. Trial registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN11290592Protocol version number: Version 4.1 (dated 16th January 2018)Study Sponsor Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust

Identifying perinatal depression with case-finding instruments : a mixed-methods study (BaBY PaNDA – Born and Bred in Yorkshire PeriNatal Depression Diagnostic Accuracy)

Background: Perinatal depression is well recognised as a mental health condition but < 50% of cases are identified in routine practice. A case-finding strategy using the Whooley questions is currently recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Objectives: To determine the diagnostic accuracy, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the Whooley questions and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) to identify perinatal depression. Design: A prospective diagnostic accuracy cohort study, with concurrent qualitative and economic evaluations. Setting: Maternity services in England. Participants: A total of 391 pregnant women. Main outcome measures: Women completed the Whooley questions, EPDS and a diagnostic reference standard (Clinical Interview Schedule – Revised) during pregnancy (20 weeks) and postnatally (3–4 months). Qualitative interviews were conducted with health professionals (HPs) and a subsample of women. Results: Diagnostic accuracy results: depression prevalence rates were 10.3% during pregnancy and 10.5% postnatally. The Whooley questions and EPDS (cut-off point of ≥ 10) performed reasonably well, with comparable sensitivity [pregnancy: Whooley questions 85.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 70.2% to 94.3%; EPDS 82.5%, 95% CI 67.2% to 92.7%; postnatally: Whooley questions 85.7%, 95% CI 69.7% to 95.2%; EPDS 82.9%, 95% CI 66.4% to 93.4%] and specificity (pregnancy: Whooley questions 83.7%, 95% CI 79.4% to 87.4%; EPDS 86.6%, 95% CI 82.5% to 90.0%; postnatally: Whooley questions 80.6%, 95% CI 75.7% to 84.9%; EPDS 87.6%, 95% CI 83.3% to 91.1%). Diagnostic accuracy of the EPDS (cut-off point of ≥ 13) was poor at both time points (pregnancy: sensitivity 45%, 95% CI 29.3% to 61.5%, and specificity 95.7%, 95% CI 93.0% to 97.6%; postnatally: sensitivity 62.9%, 95% CI 44.9% to 78.5%, and specificity 95.7%, 95% CI 92.7% to 97.7%). Qualitative evaluation: women and HPs were supportive of screening/case-finding for perinatal depression. The EPDS was preferred to the Whooley questions by women and HPs, mainly because of its ‘softer’ wording. Whooley question 1 was thought to be less acceptable, largely because of the terms ‘depressed’ and ‘hopeless’, leading to women not revealing their depressive symptoms. HPs identified a ‘patient-centred’ environment that focused on the mother and baby to promote discussion about mental health. Cost-effectiveness results: screening/case-finding using the Whooley questions or the EPDS alone was not the most cost-effective strategy. A two-stage strategy, ‘Whooley questions followed by the Patient Health Questionnaire’ (a measure assessing depression symptomatology), was the most cost-effective strategy in the range between £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year in both the prenatal and postnatal decision models. Limitations: Perinatal depression diagnosis was not cross-referenced with women’s medical records so the proportion of new cases identified is unknown. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening/case-finding strategies was not assessed as part of a randomised controlled trial. Conclusions: The Whooley questions and EPDS had acceptable sensitivity and specificity, but their use in practice might be limited by low predictive value and variation in their acceptability. A two-stage strategy was more cost-effective than single-stage strategies. Neither case-finding instrument met National Screening Committee criteria. Future work: The yield of screening/case-finding should be established with reference to health-care records. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening/case-finding for perinatal depression needs to be tested in a randomised controlled trial. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme