Urban blue space renovation and local resident and visitor well-being: A case study from Plymouth, UK

This is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordObservational studies have suggested that people with better access to attractive, safe, and inclusive blue spaces enjoy higher psychological well-being, with particular benefits for those living in deprived urban areas. However, intervention studies are scarce. To help bridge this gap we conducted a repeat cross-sectional study exploring local resident and visitor well-being before and after a small-scale intervention aimed at improving the quality of an urban beach area in a deprived neighbourhood in Plymouth, United Kingdom. Physical alterations were co-created with local stakeholders and residents, and accompanied by a series of on-site community events. Key outcomes were self-reported psychological well-being, satisfaction with personal safety and community belonging, and perceptions of site quality. Adjusted linear models showed that positive well-being (B = 7.42; 95% CI = 4.18–10.67) and life satisfaction (B = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.11–0.70) were both higher after the intervention compared to before, with associations for life satisfaction stronger among those who visited the site in the last four weeks. Associations with positive well-being were partially mediated by greater satisfaction with community belonging; and associations with life satisfaction were partially and independently mediated by greater satisfaction with personal safety and community belonging. Although caution needs to be taken due to the repeat cross-sectional design and the sampling of site visitors as well as local residents, the findings support the idea that environmental improvements to urban blue spaces can foster better psychological well-being, and underline the importance of community involvement in the process.European Union Horizon 2020Amsterdam Public Health Research Institut

Low-value clinical practices in adult traumatic brain injury : an umbrella review

Despite numerous interventions and treatment options, the outcomes of traumatic brain injury (TBI) have improved little over the last 3 decades, which raises concern about the value of care in this patient population. We aimed to synthesize the evidence on 14 potentially low-value clinical practices in TBI care. Using umbrella review methodology, we identified systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of 14 potentially low-value practices in adults with acute TBI. We present data on methodological quality (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews), reported effect sizes, and credibility of evidence (I to IV). The only clinical practice with evidence of benefit was therapeutic hypothermia (credibility of evidence II to IV). However, the most recent meta-analysis on hypothermia based on high-quality trials suggested harm (credibility of evidence IV). Meta-analyses on platelet transfusion for patients on antiplatelet therapy were all consistent with harm but were statistically non-significant. For the following practices, effect estimates were consistently close to the null: computed tomography (CT) in adults with mild TBI who are low-risk on a validated clinical decision rule; repeat CT in adults with mild TBI on anticoagulant therapy with no clinical deterioration; antibiotic prophylaxis for external ventricular drain placement; and decompressive craniectomy for refractory intracranial hypertension. We identified five clinical practices with evidence of lack of benefit or harm. However, evidence could not be considered to be strong for any clinical practice as effect measures were imprecise and heterogeneous, systematic reviews were often of low quality, and most included studies had a high risk of bias

The handbook for standardised field and laboratory measurements in terrestrial climate-change experiments and observational studies

Climate change is a worldwide threat to biodiversity and ecosystem structure, functioning, and services. To understand the underlying drivers and mechanisms, and to predict the consequences for nature and people, we urgently need better understanding of the direction and magnitude of climate‐change impacts across the soil–plant–atmosphere continuum. An increasing number of climate‐change studies is creating new opportunities for meaningful and high‐quality generalisations and improved process understanding. However, significant challenges exist related to data availability and/or compatibility across studies, compromising opportunities for data re‐use, synthesis, and upscaling. Many of these challenges relate to a lack of an established “best practice” for measuring key impacts and responses. This restrains our current understanding of complex processes and mechanisms in terrestrial ecosystems related to climate change

Protocol for the development of a tool (INSPECT-SR) to identify problematic randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of health interventions

Introduction: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) inform healthcare decisions. It is now apparent that some published RCTs contain false data and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesise all RCTs that have been conducted on a given topic. While it is usual to assess methodological features of the RCTs in the process of undertaking a systematic review, it is not usual to consider whether the RCTs contain false data. Studies containing false data therefore go unnoticed and contribute to systematic review conclusions. The INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews (INSPECT-SR) project will develop a tool to assess the trustworthiness of RCTs in systematic reviews of healthcare-related interventions. Methods and analysis: The INSPECT-SR tool will be developed using expert consensus in combination with empirical evidence, over five stages: (1) a survey of experts to assemble a comprehensive list of checks for detecting problematic RCTs, (2) an evaluation of the feasibility and impact of applying the checks to systematic reviews, (3) a Delphi survey to determine which of the checks are supported by expert consensus, culminating in, (4) a consensus meeting to select checks to be included in a draft tool and to determine its format and (5) prospective testing of the draft tool in the production of new health systematic reviews, to allow refinement based on user feedback. We anticipate that the INSPECT-SR tool will help researchers to identify problematic studies and will help patients by protecting them from the influence of false data on their healthcare. Ethics and dissemination: The University of Manchester ethics decision tool was used, and this returned the result that ethical approval was not required for this project (30 September 2022), which incorporates secondary research and surveys of professionals about subjects relating to their expertise. Informed consent will be obtained from all survey participants. All results will be published as open-access articles. The final tool will be made freely available.National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Research for Patient Benefit programme (NIHR203568)

The handbook for standardized field and laboratory measurements in terrestrial climate change experiments and observational studies (ClimEx)

1. Climate change is a world‐wide threat to biodiversity and ecosystem structure, functioning and services. To understand the underlying drivers and mechanisms, and to predict the consequences for nature and people, we urgently need better understanding of the direction and magnitude of climate change impacts across the soil–plant–atmosphere continuum. An increasing number of climate change studies are creating new opportunities for meaningful and high‐quality generalizations and improved process understanding. However, significant challenges exist related to data availability and/or compatibility across studies, compromising opportunities for data re‐use, synthesis and upscaling. Many of these challenges relate to a lack of an established ‘best practice’ for measuring key impacts and responses. This restrains our current understanding of complex processes and mechanisms in terrestrial ecosystems related to climate change. 2. To overcome these challenges, we collected best‐practice methods emerging from major ecological research networks and experiments, as synthesized by 115 experts from across a wide range of scientific disciplines. Our handbook contains guidance on the selection of response variables for different purposes, protocols for standardized measurements of 66 such response variables and advice on data management. Specifically, we recommend a minimum subset of variables that should be collected in all climate change studies to allow data re‐use and synthesis, and give guidance on additional variables critical for different types of synthesis and upscaling. The goal of this community effort is to facilitate awareness of the importance and broader application of standardized methods to promote data re‐use, availability, compatibility and transparency. We envision improved research practices that will increase returns on investments in individual research projects, facilitate second‐order research outputs and create opportunities for collaboration across scientific communities. Ultimately, this should significantly improve the quality and impact of the science, which is required to fulfil society's needs in a changing world