Preferences on Governance Models for Mental Health Data: Qualitative Study With Young People

BACKGROUND: Improving access to mental health data to accelerate research and improve mental health outcomes is a potentially achievable goal given the substantial data that can now be collected from mobile devices. Smartphones can provide a useful mechanism for collecting mental health data from young people, especially as their use is relatively ubiquitous in high-resource settings such as the United Kingdom and they have a high capacity to collect active and passive data. This raises the interesting opportunity to establish a large bank of mental health data from young people that could be accessed by researchers worldwide, but it is important to clarify how to ensure that this is done in an appropriate manner aligned with the values of young people. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we discussed the preferences of young people in the United Kingdom regarding the governance, sharing, and use of their mental health data with the establishment of a global data bank in mind. We aimed to determine whether young people want and feel safe to share their mental health data; if so, with whom; and their preferences in doing so. METHODS: Young people (N=46) were provided with 2 modules of educational material about data governance models and background in scientific research. We then conducted 2-hour web-based group sessions using a deliberative democracy methodology to reach a consensus where possible. Findings were analyzed using the framework method. RESULTS: Young people were generally enthusiastic about contributing data to mental health research. They believed that broader availability of mental health data could be used to discover what improves or worsens mental health and develop new services to support young people. However, this enthusiasm came with many concerns and caveats, including distributed control of access to ensure appropriate use, distributed power, and data management that included diverse representation and sufficient ethical training for applicants and data managers. CONCLUSIONS: Although it is feasible to use smartphones to collect mental health data from young people in the United Kingdom, it is essential to carefully consider the parameters of such a data bank. Addressing and embedding young people's preferences, including the need for robust procedures regarding how their data are managed, stored, and accessed, will set a solid foundation for establishing any global data bank

Young people's data governance preferences for their mental health data: MindKind Study findings from India, South Africa, and the United Kingdom

Mobile devices offer a scalable opportunity to collect longitudinal data that facilitate advances in mental health treatment to address the burden of mental health conditions in young people. Sharing these data with the research community is critical to gaining maximal value from rich data of this nature. However, the highly personal nature of the data necessitates understanding the conditions under which young people are willing to share them. To answer this question, we developed the MindKind Study, a multinational, mixed methods study that solicits young people's preferences for how their data are governed and quantifies potential participants' willingness to join under different conditions. We employed a community-based participatory approach, involving young people as stakeholders and co-researchers. At sites in India, South Africa, and the UK, we enrolled 3575 participants ages 16-24 in the mobile app-mediated quantitative study and 143 participants in the public deliberation-based qualitative study. We found that while youth participants have strong preferences for data governance, these preferences did not translate into (un)willingness to join the smartphone-based study. Participants grappled with the risks and benefits of participation as well as their desire that the "right people" access their data. Throughout the study, we recognized young people's commitment to finding solutions and co-producing research architectures to allow for more open sharing of mental health data to accelerate and derive maximal benefit from research

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Borderline Personality Disorder: How and why do gender and psychological trauma increase the risk of diagnosis?

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a disorder diagnosed predominantly in women, which has a strong association with trauma during childhood. In this thesis I explore these features of BPD further, to elucidate how and why female gender and psychological trauma lead individuals to be diagnosed with BPD. This thesis begins with a review of the literature surrounding borderline personality disorder (BPD). This includes a discussion of the history of BPD and the modern construct. I then consider the individual symptoms of BPD, theories surrounding BPD’s aetiology and an exploration of demographic factors associated with BPD diagnosis. The two primary demographic factors associated with BPD are female gender and experience of developmental trauma. Therefore, in Chapter 2 I review the literature on gender and psychiatry, including BPD, before going on to discuss the literature surrounding developmental trauma and BPD. I also outline several reasons to suspect that BPD might also relate to psychological trauma in adulthood. Chapter 3 provides information as to the general methods used in this thesis. I used two pre-existing databases to conduct my research, and in this chapter I outline how the original researchers obtained this data. In Chapter 4 I empirically investigate the frequently observed relationship between female gender and BPD diagnosis. I consider the extent to which this relationship is driven by a genuine relationship, differential service use of men and women with BPD symptoms, or diagnostic bias in assessing the symptoms of BPD. My data and analyses suggest that the gender difference in BPD traits is small and that differences in diagnosis rate likely relate to gender invariance of specific BPD symptoms which may be viewed by clinicians as “core” symptoms. In Chapter 5 I examine the link between developmental interpersonal trauma and development of mental health conditions including BPD. I consider the role of type of trauma, age at traumatisation and trauma severity in predicting myriad mental health outcomes. I conclude that BPD (and most other mental health conditions) are associated with childhood trauma in all its forms, but that sexual abuse involving intercourse is especially damaging. In Chapter 6 I investigate the controversial hypothesis that interpersonal trauma experienced in adulthood might contribute to BPD symptomology. BPD has historically been conceptualised as a disorder stemming from developmental trauma, but I provide evidence that individuals traumatised in adulthood may have a presentation of (possibly transient) BPD traits. In the final chapter of this thesis I relate the findings of the previous three chapters to the literature reviewed in Chapters 1 and 2 and discuss the implications of my findings to research and clinical practice. This includes discussion about the nature of psychiatric diagnoses, whether such conditions should be assessed categorically or dimensionally and whether there are indeed “core” symptoms to BPD rather than just 9 symptoms considered with equal weight. I discuss further the possibility that abuse in adulthood might lead an individual to display more traits of BPD and the effect that this finding might have on clinical practice treating adults who present with BPD or BPD-like conditions.ESRC PhD Studentshi

Editorial Perspective: When is a ‘small effect’ actually large and impactful?

Reporting of effect sizes is standard practice in psychology and psychiatry research. However, interpretation of these effect sizes can be meaningless or misleading – in particular, the evaluation of specific effect sizes as ‘small’, ‘medium’ and ‘large’ can be inaccurate depending on the research context. A real‐world example of this is research into the mental health of children and young people during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Evidence suggests that clinicians and services are struggling with increased demand, yet population studies looking at the difference in mental health before and during the pandemic report effect sizes that are deemed ‘small’. In this short review, we utilise simulations to demonstrate that a relatively small shift in mean scores on mental health measures can indicate a large shift in the number of cases of anxiety and depression when scaled up to an entire population. This shows that ‘small’ effect sizes can in some contexts be large and impactful

Preferences on Governance Models for Mental Health Data: Qualitative Study With Young People.

BACKGROUND: Improving access to mental health data to accelerate research and improve mental health outcomes is a potentially achievable goal given the substantial data that can now be collected from mobile devices. Smartphones can provide a useful mechanism for collecting mental health data from young people, especially as their use is relatively ubiquitous in high-resource settings such as the United Kingdom and they have a high capacity to collect active and passive data. This raises the interesting opportunity to establish a large bank of mental health data from young people that could be accessed by researchers worldwide, but it is important to clarify how to ensure that this is done in an appropriate manner aligned with the values of young people. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we discussed the preferences of young people in the United Kingdom regarding the governance, sharing, and use of their mental health data with the establishment of a global data bank in mind. We aimed to determine whether young people want and feel safe to share their mental health data; if so, with whom; and their preferences in doing so. METHODS: Young people (N=46) were provided with 2 modules of educational material about data governance models and background in scientific research. We then conducted 2-hour web-based group sessions using a deliberative democracy methodology to reach a consensus where possible. Findings were analyzed using the framework method. RESULTS: Young people were generally enthusiastic about contributing data to mental health research. They believed that broader availability of mental health data could be used to discover what improves or worsens mental health and develop new services to support young people. However, this enthusiasm came with many concerns and caveats, including distributed control of access to ensure appropriate use, distributed power, and data management that included diverse representation and sufficient ethical training for applicants and data managers. CONCLUSIONS: Although it is feasible to use smartphones to collect mental health data from young people in the United Kingdom, it is essential to carefully consider the parameters of such a data bank. Addressing and embedding young people's preferences, including the need for robust procedures regarding how their data are managed, stored, and accessed, will set a solid foundation for establishing any global data bank

Young people’s data governance preferences for their mental health data: MindKind Study findings from India, South Africa, and the United Kingdom

Funder: Wellcome Trust; funder-id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100010269Mobile devices offer a scalable opportunity to collect longitudinal data that facilitate advances in mental health treatment to address the burden of mental health conditions in young people. Sharing these data with the research community is critical to gaining maximal value from rich data of this nature. However, the highly personal nature of the data necessitates understanding the conditions under which young people are willing to share them. To answer this question, we developed the MindKind Study, a multinational, mixed methods study that solicits young people’s preferences for how their data are governed and quantifies potential participants’ willingness to join under different conditions. We employed a community-based participatory approach, involving young people as stakeholders and co-researchers. At sites in India, South Africa, and the UK, we enrolled 3575 participants ages 16–24 in the mobile app-mediated quantitative study and 143 participants in the public deliberation-based qualitative study. We found that while youth participants have strong preferences for data governance, these preferences did not translate into (un)willingness to join the smartphone-based study. Participants grappled with the risks and benefits of participation as well as their desire that the “right people” access their data. Throughout the study, we recognized young people’s commitment to finding solutions and co-producing research architectures to allow for more open sharing of mental health data to accelerate and derive maximal benefit from research