How explicable are differences between reviews that appear to address a similar research question? A review of reviews of physical activity interventions

Background Systematic reviews are promoted as being important to inform decision-making. However, when presented with a set of reviews in a complex area, how easy is it to understand how and why they may differ from one another? Methods An analysis of eight reviews reporting evidence on effectiveness of community interventions to promote physical activity. We assessed review quality and investigated overlap of included studies, citation of relevant reviews, consistency in reporting, and reasons why specific studies may be excluded. Results There were 28 included studies. The majority (n = 22; 79%) were included only in one review. There was little cross-citation between reviews (n = 4/28 possible citations; 14%). Where studies appeared in multiple reviews, results were consistently reported except for complex studies with multiple publications. Review conclusions were similar. For most reviews (n = 6/8; 75%), we could explain why primary data were not included; this was usually due to the scope of the reviews. Most reviews tended to be narrow in focus, making it difficult to gain an understanding of the field as a whole. Conclusions In areas where evaluating impact is known to be difficult, review findings often relate to uncertainty of data and methodologies, rather than providing substantive findings for policy and practice. Systematic ‘maps’ of research can help identify where existing research is robust enough for multiple in-depth syntheses and also show where new reviews are needed. To ensure quality and fidelity, review authors should systematically search for all publications from complex studies. Other relevant reviews should be searched for and cited to facilitate knowledge-building

UC-263 IT4983 Cybersecurity Capstone

For the Cybersecurity capstone project, our team was given a webserver and website for the company Akwaaba. We were tasked to fix all vulnerabilities, keep the server up to date, and help maintain the site with uptime being the priority. After the first two milestones were complete, we were to attempt to hack another team’s server while they attempted to do the same to us. When the attack phase began on Wednesday 10/26, our team discovered the other team had not changed any of their original passwords, so we took control within thirty minutes and took it down soon after. As of 10/30, their site is still down while we haven’t noticed any issues with our own. The attack phase has two weeks to go (ending on 11/14), so our group is actively monitoring both servers. Should the other team recover their server, we will make attempts to get back in and shut it down again. In the meantime, we have full confidence in our own server and do not anticipate any downtime

‘On paper, you’re normal’: narratives of unseen health needs among women who have had children removed from their care

Background: Mothers who have children removed from their care often have complex needs. These women have poor health outcomes and are dying earlier than their peers from preventable and amenable causes. Yet there is little known about how health care services might mitigate these risks. This study aimed to listen to the voices of women who had children removed from their care to understand their experiences of health and healthcare.// Methods: We used a narrative approach to collect and analyse interview data with six mothers who had experienced child removal in England. Each participant was asked to reflect on their life and main health challenges.// Results: Three narrative subplots were developed to consolidate experiences of unmet health need: (i) ‘on paper you’re normal’: narratives of complex need, (ii) ‘in my family, everyone had issues’: narratives of whole family need and (iii) ‘I’m still mummy, no matter where they are’: narratives of maternal identity and health.// Conclusions: Findings highlight limitations within current systems of support, including a culture of distrust and women falling between the gaps of services. Women’s narratives illustrate opportunities for health intervention, especially immediately following child removal

Parental health in the context of public family care proceedings: A scoping review of evidence and interventions

Background Child protective services (CPS), or their equivalent, have statutory power to remove children from birth parents in instances of child abuse, neglect, or concerns around parenting capacity via public family care proceedings. Parents who have children subject to proceedings, ‘birth parents’, often have complex health and social care needs. Objective We aimed to review what is known about the health needs of birth parents and the interventions implemented to support these health needs. Methods We searched PubMed, Scopus, and grey literature using a systematic strategy of key concepts “health”, “care proceedings”, and “parents”. We included all publications in English that reported parental health in the context of care proceedings from the 1st of January 2000 to the 1st of March 2021. Results Included studies (n = 61) reported on maternal health (57 %) or the health of both parents (40 %), with only one study reporting on fathers alone. We conceptually categorised parental health need (n = 41) into i) mental health, ii) physical health, iii) substance misuse, iv) developmental disorders, and v) reproductive health. Health inequities and poor access to services were described across all categories, with longstanding issues often pre-dating proceedings or the child's birth. All interventions supporting parental health (n = 20) were targeted at mothers, with some supporting fathers (n = 8), formally or informally. We grouped similar interventions into three types: alternative family courts, wrap-around services, and specialist advocacy/peer support. Conclusions Parents who have children subject to care proceedings have complex health needs that pre-date CPS concerns. The studies included in our review strongly suggest that health issues are exacerbated by child removal, triggering deteriorations in mental health, poor antenatal health for subsequent pregnancies, and avoidable mortality. Findings highlight the need for targeted and timely intervention for parents to improve whole-family outcomes. There are models that have been designed, implemented, and tested using relationship-based, trauma-informed, multidisciplinary, family-focused, and long-term approaches

Child and family-focused interventions for child maltreatment and domestic abuse:Development of core outcome sets

BACKGROUND: The current evidence for child maltreatment (CM) and domestic violence and abuse (DVA) interventions is limited by the diversity of outcomes evaluated and the variety of measures used. The result is studies that are difficult to compare and lack focus on outcomes reflecting service user or provider priorities. OBJECTIVE: To develop core outcome sets (COSs) for evaluations of child and family-focused interventions for: (1) CM and (2) DVA. DESIGN: We conducted a two-stage consensus process. Stage 1: a long list of candidate outcomes across CM and DVA was developed through rapid systematic reviews of intervention studies, qualitative and grey literature; stakeholder workshops; survivor interviews. Stage 2: three-panel, three-round e-Delphi surveys for CM and DVA with consensus meetings to agree with the final COSs. PARTICIPANTS: 287 stakeholders participated in at least one stage of the process (ie, either CM or DVA COS development): workshops (n=76), two e-Delphi surveys (n=170) and consensus meetings (n=43). Stakeholders included CM and DVA survivors, practitioners, commissioners, policymakers and researchers. RESULTS: Stage 1 identified 335 outcomes categorised into 9 areas and 39 domains. Following stage 2, the final five outcomes included in the CM-COS were: child emotional health and well-being; child’s trusted relationships; feelings of safety; child abuse and neglect; service harms. The final five outcomes in the DVA-COS were: child emotional health and well-being; caregiver emotional health and well-being; family relationships; freedom to go about daily life; feelings of safety. CONCLUSIONS: We developed two COSs for CM and DVA with two common outcomes (child emotional health and well-being; feelings of safety). The COSs reflect shared priorities among service users, providers and researchers. Use of these COSs across trials and service evaluations for children and families affected by CM and DVA will make outcome selection more consistent and help harmonise research and practice

Changes in adolescents' planned hospital care during the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis of linked administrative data

OBJECTIVE: To describe changes in planned hospital care during the pandemic for vulnerable adolescents receiving children's social care (CSC) services or special educational needs (SEN) support, relative to their peers. DESIGN: Observational cohort in the Education and Child Health Insights from Linked Data database (linked de-identified administrative health, education and social care records of all children in England). STUDY POPULATION: All secondary school pupils in years 7-11 in academic year 2019/2020 (N=3 030 235). MAIN EXPOSURE: Receiving SEN support or CSC services. MAIN OUTCOMES: Changes in outpatient attendances and planned hospital admissions during the first 9 months of the pandemic (23 March-31 December 2020), estimated by comparing predicted with observed numbers and rates per 1000 child-years. RESULTS: A fifth of pupils (20.5%) received some form of statutory support: 14.2% received SEN support only, 3.6% received CSC services only and 2.7% received both. Decreases in planned hospital care were greater for these vulnerable adolescents than their peers: -290 vs -225 per 1000 child-years for outpatient attendances and -36 vs -16 per 1000 child-years for planned admissions. Overall, 21% of adolescents who were vulnerable disproportionately bore 25% of the decrease in outpatient attendances and 37% of the decrease in planned hospital admissions. Vulnerable adolescents were less likely than their peers to have face-to-face outpatient care. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that socially vulnerable groups of children have high health needs, which may need to be prioritised to ensure equitable provision, including for catch-up of planned care postpandemic

Variation in health visiting contacts for children in England: cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review using administrative data (Community Services Dataset, CSDS)

Objective: The 2–2½ year universal health visiting review in England is a key time point for assessing child development and promoting school readiness. We aimed to ascertain which children were least likely to receive their 2–2½ year review and whether there were additional non-mandated contacts for children who missed this review. Design, setting, participants: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2–2½ year review and additional health visiting contacts for 181 130 children aged 2 in England 2018/2019, stratified by ethnicity, deprivation, safeguarding vulnerability indicator and Looked After Child status. Analysis: We used data from 33 local authorities submitting highly complete data on health visiting contacts to the Community Services Dataset. We calculated the percentage of children with a recorded 2–2½ year review and/or any additional health visiting contacts and average number of contacts, by child characteristic. Results: The most deprived children were slightly less likely to receive a 2–2½ year review than the least deprived children (72% vs 78%) and Looked After Children much less likely, compared with other children (44% vs 69%). When all additional contacts were included, the pattern was reversed (deprivation) or disappeared (Looked After children). A substantial proportion of all children (24%), children with a ‘safeguarding vulnerability’ (22%) and Looked After children (29%) did not have a record of either a 2–2½ year review or any other face-to-face contact in the year. Conclusions: A substantial minority of children aged 2 with known vulnerabilities did not see the health visiting team at all in the year. Some higher need children (eg, deprived and Looked After) appeared to be seeing the health visiting team but not receiving their mandated health review. Further work is needed to establish the reasons for this, and potential solutions. There is an urgent need to improve the quality of national health visiting data