"I've made this my lifestyle now": a prospective qualitative study of motivation for lifestyle change among people with newly diagnosed type two diabetes mellitus

This is the final published version. Available from BMC via the DOI in this record.The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to the level of personal information that is contained in the qualitative transcripts.Background: Diagnosis with Type 2 Diabetes is an opportunity for individuals to change their physical activity and dietary behaviours. Diabetes treatment guidelines recommend theory-based, patient-centred care and advocate the provision of support for patient motivation but the motivational experiences of people newly diagnosed with diabetes have not been well studied. Framed in self-determination theory, this study aimed to qualitatively explore how this patient group articulate and experience different types of motivation when attempting lifestyle change. Methods: A secondary analysis of semi-structured interview data collected with 30 (n female = 18, n male = 12) adults who had been newly diagnosed with type two diabetes and were participants in the Early ACTID trial was undertaken. Deductive directed content analysis was performed using NVivo V10 and researcher triangulation to identify and describe patient experiences and narratives that reflected the motivation types outlined in selfdetermination theory and if/how these changed over time. Results: The findings revealed the diversity in motivation quality both between and within individuals over time and that patients with newly-diagnosed diabetes have multifaceted often competing motivations for lifestyle behaviour change. Applying self-determination theory, we identified that many participants reported relatively dominant controlled motivation to comply with lifestyle recommendations, avoid their non-compliance being “found out” or supress guilt following lapses in behaviour change attempts. Such narratives were accompanied by experiences of frustrating slow behaviour change progress. More autonomous motivation was expressed as something often achieved over time and reflected goals to improve health, quality of life or family time. Motivational internalisation was evident and some participants had integrated their behaviour change to a new way of life which they found resilient to common barriers. Conclusions: Motivation for lifestyle change following diagnosis with type two diabetes is complex and can be relatively low in self-determination. To achieve the patient empowerment aspirations of current national health care plans, intervention developers, and clinicians would do well to consider the quality not just quantity of their patients’ motivation.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Mediation and moderation of genetic risk of obesity through eating behaviours in two UK cohorts

This is the final version. Available on open access from Oxford University Press (OUP) via the DOI in this recordData availability: The data underlying this article are available upon request to the ALSPAC data portal. The ALSPAC data management plan describes in detail the policy regarding data sharing, which is through a system of managed open access. Full instructions for applying for data access can be found here: [http://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/access/].Background The mechanisms underlying genetic predisposition to higher body mass index (BMI) remain unclear. Methods We hypothesized that the relationship between BMI-genetic risk score (BMI-GRS) and BMI was mediated via disinhibition, emotional eating and hunger, and moderated by flexible (but not rigid) restraint within two UK cohorts: the Genetics of Appetite Study (GATE) (n = 2101, 2010–16) and the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) (n = 1679, 2014–18). Eating behaviour was measured by the Adult Eating Behaviour Questionnaire and Three-Factor Eating Questionaire-51. Results The association between BMI-GRS and BMI were partially mediated by habitual, emotional and situational disinhibition in the GATE/ALSPAC meta-mediation [standardized betaindirect 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02–0.06; 0.03, 0.01–0.04; 0.03, 0.01–0.04, respectively] external hunger and internal hunger in the GATE study (0.02, 0.01–0.03; 0.01, 0.001–0.02, respectively). There was evidence of mediation by emotional over/undereating and hunger in the ALSPAC study (0.02, 0.01–0.03; 0.01, 0.001–0.02; 0.01, 0.002–0.01, respectively). Rigid or flexible restraint did not moderate the direct association between BMI-GRS and BMI, but high flexible restraint moderated the effect of disinhibition subscales on BMI (reduction of the indirect mediation by -5% to -11% in GATE/ALSPAC) and external hunger (-5%) in GATE. High rigid restraint reduced the mediation via disinhibition subscales in GATE/ALSPAC (-4% to -11%) and external hunger (-3%) in GATE. Conclusions Genetic predisposition to a higher BMI was partly explained by disinhibition and hunger in two large cohorts. Flexible/rigid restraint may play an important role in moderating the impact of predisposition to higher BMI.Medical Research Council (MRC)National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR)University of BristolEuropean Research Council (ERC

“In my day…”-parents’ views on children’s physical activity and screen viewing in relation to their own childhood

Physical activity and screen viewing are associated with cardio-metabolic risk factors, psychological wellbeing, and academic performance among children. Across the last generation, children's physical activity and screen viewing behaviours have changed, coinciding with changes to the home and neighbourhood environment. This study aimed to qualitatively explore parents' views on their 8⁻9-year-old child's childhood and how this compares to experiences from their own childhood, with a specific focus on physical activity and screen viewing behaviours. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 51 parents (mean age = 41.2 years, range 31.5 to 51.5 years), between July and October 2016. Inductive and deductive content analyses were used to explore parents' perceptions of their child's physical activity and screen viewing behaviours in comparison to their own childhood behaviours. Interview data revealed that compared to the relative freedom they recalled as children, parents restrict their children's independent mobility and outdoor play due to concerns about safety. Despite their children having greater access to structured activities than they did as children, parents feel their children are "missing out," and perceived their own childhood as better with regards to maximising independent and outdoor play and limiting screen viewing. Innovative strategies are needed to change the social norms surrounding children's independent mobility and outdoor play.Emma Solomon-Moore, Lydia G. Emm-Collison, Simon J. Sebire, Zoi Toumpakari, Janice L. Thompson , Deborah A. Lawlor and Russell Jag

Validation of the English version of the 14-Item Mediterranean diet adherence screener of the PREDIMED study, in people at high cardiovascular risk in the UK

The aim of this study was to examine the validity of the English version of the PREvencion con DIetaMEDiterranea (PREDIMED) 14-item Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS), a brief questionnaire assessing adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet), which was used in the PREDIMED trial for assessment and immediate feedback. This instrument (MEDAS) was administered to 96 adults with a high cardiovascular risk (66% women, mean age 68.3 ± 6.0 years), recruited from general practices in Bristol, UK. Participants then completed a 3-day estimated food record, and the MEDAS was administered again one month later. A MedDiet score (range = 0-14) was calculated from the MEDAS' administrations and food record to assess concurrent validity and test-retest reliability. Predictive validity was assessed by examining the association of the MEDAS-derived score with cardiometabolic risk factors and dietary intakes derived from the food records. The MEDAS-derived MedDiet score was higher by 1.47 points compared to food records (5.47 vs.4.00, p < 0.001), correlated moderately with the record-derived score (r = 0.50, p < 0.001; ICC = 0.53, p < 0.001) and there was borderline fair agreement between the two methods (¿ = 0.19, 95% CI 0.07-0.31, p = 0.002; 95% limits of agreement -2.2, 5.1). Exact agreement within score categories and gross misclassificationwere 45.8% and 21.9%, respectively. The distribution of dietary intakes, reported on the food records by the MEDAS-derived total MedDiet score, was in the expected direction, but no association was observed with cardiometabolic risk factors. The two administrations of the MEDAS produced similar mean total MedDiet scores (5.5 vs. 5.4, p = 0.706), which were correlated (r and ICC = 0.69, p < 0.001) and agreed fairly (¿ = 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.52, p < 0.001; 95% limits of agreement -3.1, 3.2). The English version of the MEDAS has acceptable accuracy and reliability for assessing MedDiet adherence among individuals with a high cardiovascular risk, in the UK, and can be used to rank individuals according to MedDiet adherence in research and practice

Assessing exposure to outdoor advertisement for products high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS); is self-reported exposure a useful exposure metric?

Background Exposure to advertising of unhealthy commodities such as fast-food and gambling is recognised as a risk factor for developing non-communicable diseases. Assessment of the impact of such advertisement and the evaluation of the impact of any policies to restrict such advertisements on public health are reliant on the quality of the exposure assessment. A straightforward method for assessing exposure is to ask people whether they noticed any such advertisements in their neighbourhoods. However, the validity of this method is unclear. We assessed the associations between measured exposure to outdoor advertising, self-reported exposure, and self-reported consumption. Methods We collected exposure information in January-March 2022 using two methods: (i) through a resident survey investigating advertising and consumption of unhealthy products, distributed across Bristol and neighbouring South Gloucestershire, and (ii) through in-person auditing. Self-reported exposure was obtained from the resident survey (N = 2,560) and measured exposure from photos obtained for all Council owned advertisement sites (N = 973 bus stops). Both data sources were geographically linked at lower-super-output-area level. Reporting ratios (RRs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and Cohen’s kappas, are presented. Results 24% of advertisements displayed food and/or drink advertising. Bristol respondents in neighbourhoods displaying food/drink adverts were more likely to also report seeing these adverts compared to those in neighbourhoods without food/drink adverts (59% vs. 51%, RR = 1.15, 95%CI 1.01–1.31). There was no such association in South Gloucestershire (26% vs. 32%, RR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.58–1.14). Respondents in both Bristol and South Gloucestershire who recalled seeing advertising for unhealthy food and drink products were more likely to consume them (e.g. for fast-food: 22% vs. 11%, RR = 2.01, 95%CI 1.68–2.42). There was no such association between measured food and drink adverts in respondents’ local areas and self-reported consumption of HFSS product (90.1% vs. 90.7%, RR = 0.99, 95%CI 0.96–1.03). Conclusions Self-reported outdoor advertisement exposure is correlated with measured exposure, making this a useful methodology for population studies. It has the added advantage that it correlates with consumption. However, given that measurement error can be significant and self-reported exposure is known to be susceptible to various biases, inferences from studies using this exposure metric should be made with caution

Advertisement of unhealthy commodities in Bristol and South Gloucestershire and rationale for a new advertisement policy

Background Bristol City Council introduced a new advertisement policy in 2021/2022 which included prohibiting the advertising of unhealthy food and drink (HFSS), alcohol, gambling and payday loans across council-owned advertising spaces. This mixed methods study is part of the BEAR study, and aimed to explore the rationale and the barriers and facilitators to implementing the policy, and describe the perceived advertising environment prior to implementation. Methods Semi-structured interviews were carried out with seven stakeholders involved in the design and implementation of the advertising policy. A stakeholder topic guide was developed before interviews took place to help standardise the lines of inquiry between interviewees. A resident survey was developed to collect socio-demographic data and, for the purpose of this study, information regarding observations of advertising for HFSS products, alcohol and gambling. Results Fifty-eight percent of respondents residing in Bristol and South Gloucestershire reported seeing advertisements for unhealthy commodities in the week prior to completing the survey. This was highest for HFSS products (40%). 16% of residents reported seeing HFSS product advertisements specifically appealing to children. For HFSS products in particular, younger people were more likely to report seeing adverts than older people, as were those who were from more deprived areas. An advertisement policy that restricts the advertisement of such unhealthy commodities, and in particular for HFSS products, has the potential to reduce health inequalities. This rationale directly influenced the development of the advertisement policy in Bristol. Implementation of the policy benefitted from an existing supportive environment following the ‘health in all policies’ initiative and a focus on reducing health inequalities across the city. Conclusions Unhealthy product advertisements, particularly for unhealthy food and drinks, were observed more by younger people and those living in more deprived areas. Policies that specifically restrict such advertisements, therefore, have the potential to reduce health inequalities, as was the hope when this policy was developed. Future evaluation of the policy will provide evidence of any public health impact

Ultra-processed food consumption in UK adolescents: distribution, trends, and sociodemographic correlates using the National Diet and Nutrition Survey 2008/09 to 2018/19

Purpose We quantified levels of ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption and investigated consumption patterns in a representative sample of UK adolescents. Methods We used data from 4-day food diaries from adolescents in the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS) (2008/09-2018/19). UPF were identified using the NOVA classification. We estimated the percentage of Total Energy Intake (%TEI) and the absolute weight (grams). Linear regression models quantified differences in UPF consumption across survey years and its association with participant’s individual characteristics. This was an analysis of the repeated cross-sectional data from the UK NDNS Rolling Programme waves 1-11 (2008/09-2018/19). A total of 2,991 adolescents (11-18y) with complete information on dietary intake were included. Results Mean UPF consumption was 861 (SD 442) g/d and this accounted for 65.9% (SD 13.4%) of TEI. Between 2008 and 2019, mean UPF consumption decreased from 996 to 776 g/d [-211 (95%CI: -302;-120)] and from 67.7% to 62.8% of TEI [-4.8% (95%CI:- 8.1;-1.5)]. Higher %TEI was consumed by adolescents with lower socioeconomic status; white ethnicity and living in England North. A higher weight of UPF consumption (g/d) was associated with being male, white, age 18y, having parents with routine or manual occupation, living in England North, and living with obesity. Conclusion Average energy intake from UPF has decreased over a decade in UK adolescents. We observed a social and regional patterning of UPF consumption, with higher consumption among adolescents from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, from a white ethnicity and living in England North. Our findings suggest inequalities associated with UPF intake and factors that might lie beyond individual choice.This study was part of YCU PhD studentship funded by the NIHR School for Public Health Research (Grant Reference Number PD-SPH-2015), supervised by Frank de Vocht, Russell Jago, Zoi Toumpakari and Martin White. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The NIHR School for Public Health Research is a partnership between the Universities of Sheffield; Bristol; Cambridge; Imperial; and University College London; The London School for Hygiene and Tropical 494 Medicine (LSHTM); LiLaC – a collaboration between the Universities of Liverpool and Lancaster; and Fuse - The Centre for Translational Research in Public Health a collaboration between Newcastle, Durham, Northumbria, Sunderland and Teesside Universities. YCU is now a postdoctoral research associate at the Medical Research Council (MRC) to the MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge [grant number MC_UU_00006/5] and this study received funding for publication by the MRC Epidemiology Unit. EVS acknowledge support from the MRC Epidemiology Unit (MC_UU_00006/5). NGF acknowledges support from the MRC Epidemiology Unit (MC_UU_00006/3), the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR203312), and she is an NIHR Senior Investigator. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. JA is supported by the MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge [Medical Research Council grant number MC/UU/00006/7] mrc.ukri.org. KO is supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00006/2). FDV and RJ are partially funded by the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

Validation of the English version of the 14-Item Mediterranean diet adherence screener of the PREDIMED study, in people at high cardiovascular risk in the UK

The aim of this study was to examine the validity of the English version of the PREvencion con DIetaMEDiterranea (PREDIMED) 14-item Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS), a brief questionnaire assessing adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet), which was used in the PREDIMED trial for assessment and immediate feedback. This instrument (MEDAS) was administered to 96 adults with a high cardiovascular risk (66% women, mean age 68.3 ± 6.0 years), recruited from general practices in Bristol, UK. Participants then completed a 3-day estimated food record, and the MEDAS was administered again one month later. A MedDiet score (range = 0-14) was calculated from the MEDAS' administrations and food record to assess concurrent validity and test-retest reliability. Predictive validity was assessed by examining the association of the MEDAS-derived score with cardiometabolic risk factors and dietary intakes derived from the food records. The MEDAS-derived MedDiet score was higher by 1.47 points compared to food records (5.47 vs.4.00, p < 0.001), correlated moderately with the record-derived score (r = 0.50, p < 0.001; ICC = 0.53, p < 0.001) and there was borderline fair agreement between the two methods (¿ = 0.19, 95% CI 0.07-0.31, p = 0.002; 95% limits of agreement -2.2, 5.1). Exact agreement within score categories and gross misclassificationwere 45.8% and 21.9%, respectively. The distribution of dietary intakes, reported on the food records by the MEDAS-derived total MedDiet score, was in the expected direction, but no association was observed with cardiometabolic risk factors. The two administrations of the MEDAS produced similar mean total MedDiet scores (5.5 vs. 5.4, p = 0.706), which were correlated (r and ICC = 0.69, p < 0.001) and agreed fairly (¿ = 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.52, p < 0.001; 95% limits of agreement -3.1, 3.2). The English version of the MEDAS has acceptable accuracy and reliability for assessing MedDiet adherence among individuals with a high cardiovascular risk, in the UK, and can be used to rank individuals according to MedDiet adherence in research and practice

Exploring views of members of the public and policymakers on the acceptability of population level dietary and active-travel policies: a qualitative study

Acknowledgements: The research team would like to thank members of the public and policymakers for participating in the study and providing their insights in this area of research.Abstract Background There is limited evidence on what shapes the acceptability of population level dietary and active-travel policies in England. This information would be useful in the decision-making process about which policies should be implemented and how to increase their effectiveness and sustainability. To fill this gap, we explored public and policymakers’ views about factors that influence public acceptability of dietary and active-travel policies and how to increase public acceptability for these policies. Methods We conducted online, semi-structured interviews with 20 members of the public and 20 policymakers in England. A purposive sampling frame was used to recruit members of the public via a recruitment agency, based on age, sex, socioeconomic status and ethnicity. Policymakers were recruited from existing contacts within our research collaborations and via snowball sampling. We explored different dietary and active-travel policies that varied in their scope and focus. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic reflexive analysis with both inductive and deductive coding. Results We identified four themes that informed public acceptability of dietary and active-travel policies: (1) perceived policy effectiveness, i.e., policies that included believable mechanisms of action, addressed valued co-benefits and barriers to engage in the behaviour; (2) perceived policy fairness, i.e., policies that provided everyone with an opportunity to benefit (mentioned only by the public), equally considered the needs of various population subgroups and rewarded ‘healthy’ behaviours rather than only penalising ‘unhealthy’ behaviours; (3) communication of policies, i.e., policies that were visible and had consistent and positive messages from the media (mentioned only by policymakers) and (4) how to improve policy support, with the main suggestion being an integrated strategy addressing multiple aspects of these behaviours, inclusive policies that consider everyone’s needs and use of appropriate channels and messages in policy communication. Conclusions Our findings highlight that members’ of the public and policymakers’ support for dietary and active-travel policies can be shaped by the perceived effectiveness, fairness and communication of policies and provide suggestions on how to improve policy support. This information can inform the design of acceptable policies but can also be used to help communicate existing and future policies to maximise their adoption and sustainability. </jats:sec

Exploring views of members of the public and policymakers on the acceptability of population level dietary and active-travel policies: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence on what shapes the acceptability of population level dietary and active-travel policies in England. This information would be useful in the decision-making process about which policies should be implemented and how to increase their effectiveness and sustainability. To fill this gap, we explored public and policymakers' views about factors that influence public acceptability of dietary and active-travel policies and how to increase public acceptability for these policies. METHODS: We conducted online, semi-structured interviews with 20 members of the public and 20 policymakers in England. A purposive sampling frame was used to recruit members of the public via a recruitment agency, based on age, sex, socioeconomic status and ethnicity. Policymakers were recruited from existing contacts within our research collaborations and via snowball sampling. We explored different dietary and active-travel policies that varied in their scope and focus. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic reflexive analysis with both inductive and deductive coding. RESULTS: We identified four themes that informed public acceptability of dietary and active-travel policies: (1) perceived policy effectiveness, i.e., policies that included believable mechanisms of action, addressed valued co-benefits and barriers to engage in the behaviour; (2) perceived policy fairness, i.e., policies that provided everyone with an opportunity to benefit (mentioned only by the public), equally considered the needs of various population subgroups and rewarded 'healthy' behaviours rather than only penalising 'unhealthy' behaviours; (3) communication of policies, i.e., policies that were visible and had consistent and positive messages from the media (mentioned only by policymakers) and (4) how to improve policy support, with the main suggestion being an integrated strategy addressing multiple aspects of these behaviours, inclusive policies that consider everyone's needs and use of appropriate channels and messages in policy communication. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight that members' of the public and policymakers' support for dietary and active-travel policies can be shaped by the perceived effectiveness, fairness and communication of policies and provide suggestions on how to improve policy support. This information can inform the design of acceptable policies but can also be used to help communicate existing and future policies to maximise their adoption and sustainability.This study is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research (SPHR), Grant Reference Number PD-SPH-2015. ‘The NIHR did not provide any input in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of data or in writing the manuscript. The research was conducted independently of the funders, and the views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR. The final version of the paper and ultimate decision to submit for publication was determined by the authors.’ The NIHR School for Public Health Research is a partnership between the Universities of Sheffield; Bristol; Cambridge; Imperial; University College London; The London School for Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM); LiLaC – a collaboration between the Universities of Liverpool and Lancaster; and Fuse - The Centre for Translational Research in Public Health a collaboration between Newcastle, Durham, Northumbria, Sunderland and Teesside Universities. RJ is partly funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West). JA & MW are supported by the Medical Research Council (grant number MC_UU_00006/7)