Michele P. Dyson

A Systematic Review of Social Media Use to Discuss and View Deliberate Self-Harm Acts

Objective To conduct a systematic review of studies of social media platforms used by young people to discuss and view deliberate self-harm. Study Design 11 electronic databases were searched from January 2000 to January 2012 for primary research; in June 2014 an updated search of Medline was conducted. Grey literature sources were also searched. Search results were screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by another. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results Due to heterogeneity in study objectives and outcomes, results were not pooled; a narrative analysis is presented. 26 studies were included. Most were conducted in Canada or the UK (30.8% each), used qualitative designs (42.3%), and evaluated discussion forums (73.1%). Participants were most often aged 19–21 years (69.2%), female (mean 68.6%), and 19.2% had a documented history of depression. The social media platforms evaluated were commonly supportive and provided a sense of community among users. Support included suggestions for formal treatment, advice on stopping self-harming behavior, and encouragement. Harms included normalizing and accepting self-harming behavior; discussion of motivation or triggers, concealment, suicidal ideation or plans; and live depictions of self-harm acts. Conclusions Although this evidence is limited by its descriptive nature, studies identify beneficial and detrimental effects for young people using social media to discuss and view deliberate self-harm. The connections users make online may be valuable to explore for therapeutic benefit. Prospective, longitudinal investigations are needed to identify short- and long-term potential harms associated with use.

Registration status and methodological reporting of randomized controlled trials in obesity research: A review

To assess registration and reporting details of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2011 to 2016 across four obesity journals.

AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews—paper 4: selecting analytic approaches

BACKGROUND Systematic reviews of complex interventions can vary widely in purpose, data availability and heterogeneity, and stakeholder expectations. RATIONALE This article addresses the uncertainty that systematic reviewers face in selecting methods for reviews of complex interventions. Specifically, it lays out parameters for systematic reviewers to consider when selecting analytic approaches that best answer the questions at hand and suggests analytic techniques that may be appropriate in different circumstances. DISCUSSION Systematic reviews of complex interventions comprising multiple questions may use multiple analytic approaches. Parameters to consider when choosing analytic methods for complex interventions include nature and timing of the decision (clinical practice guideline, policy, or other); purpose of the review; extent of existing evidence; logistic factors such as the timeline, process, and resources for deciding the scope of the review; and value of information to be obtained from choosing specific systematic review methods. Reviewers may elect to revise their analytic approach based on new or changing considerations during the course of the review but should guard against bias through transparency of reporting.

Implementation of eMental Health care: viewpoints from key informants from organizations and agencies with eHealth mandates

BackgroundThe use of technology such as computers, tablets, and smartphones to improve access to and the delivery of mental health care (eMental Health care) is growing worldwide. However, despite the rapidly expanding evidence base demonstrating the efficacy of eMental Health care, its implementation in clinical practice and health care systems remains fragmented. To date, no peer-reviewed, key-informant studies have reported on the perspectives of decision-makers concerned with whether and how to implement eMental Health care.MethodsFrom September to November 2015, we conducted 31 interviews with key informants responsible for leadership, policy, research, and/ or information technology in organizations influential in the adoption of technology for eMental Health care. Deductive and inductive thematic analyses of transcripts were conducted using the Behavior Change Wheel as an organizing framework. Frequency and intensity effect sizes were calculated for emerging themes to further explore patterns within the data.ResultsKey informant responses (n = 31) representing 6 developed countries and multiple organizations showed consensus on common factors impacting implementation: individual and organizational capacities (e.g., computer literacy skills [patients and providers], knowledge gaps about cyber security, limited knowledge of available services); motivational drivers of technology-based care (e.g., extending care, data analytics); and opportunities for health systems to advance eMental Health care implementation (e.g., intersectoral research, rapid testing cycles, sustainable funding). Frequency effect sizes showed strong associations between implementation and credibility, knowledge, workflow, patient empowerment, electronic medical record (EMR) integration, sustained funding and intersectoral networks. Intensity effect sizes showed the highest concentration of statements (>10% of all comments) related to funding, credibility, knowledge gaps, and patient empowerment.ConclusionThis study provides previously unavailable information about key informant perspectives on eMental Health care implementation. The themes that emerged, namely the need to intensify intersectoral research, measure/monitor readiness to implement, define cost-utility benchmarks, raise awareness about available technologies, and test assumptions that ‘proven’ technologies will be easily integrated can inform the design and evaluation of eMental Health care implementation models.

A systematic review of management strategies for children’s mental health care in the emergency department: update on evidence and recommendations for clinical practice and research

Objective Children with mental health crises require access to specialised resources and services which are not yet standard in general and paediatric EDs. In 2010, we published a systematic review that provided some evidence to support the use of specialised care models to reduce hospitalisation, return ED visits and length of ED stay. We perform a systematic review to update the evidence base and inform current policy statements. Methods Twelve databases and the grey literature were searched up to January 2015. Seven studies were included in the review (four newly identified studies). These studies compared ED-based strategies designed to assess, treat and/or therapeutically support or manage a mental health presentation. The methodological quality of six studies was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Risk of Bias tool (one interrupted time series study) and a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (three retrospective cohort and two before–after studies). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was applied to rate overall evidence quality (high, moderate, low or very low) for individual outcomes from these six studies. An additional study evaluated the psychometric properties of a clinical instrument and was assessed using criteria developed by the Society of Pediatric Psychology Assessment Task Force (well-established, approaching well-established or promising assessment). Results There is low to very low overall evidence quality that: (1) use of screening laboratory tests to medically clear mental health patients increases length of ED stay and costs, but does not increase the risk of clinical management or disposition change if not conducted; and (2) specialised models of ED care reduce lengths of ED stay, security man-hours and restraint orders. One mental health assessment tool of promising quality, the home, education, activities and peers, drugs and alcohol, suicidality, emotions and behaviour, discharge resources (HEADS-ED), has had good accuracy in predicting admission to inpatient psychiatry. Conclusions Lower-quality data suggest benefits to the use of specialised resources and services for paediatric mental health care in general and paediatric EDs. Experimental evaluation of strategies and the inclusion of patient-reported outcomes will improve confidence in these findings. Additional psychometric studies are needed for the HEADS-ED tool to be considered well established.

eMental Healthcare Technologies for Anxiety and Depression in Childhood and Adolescence: Systematic Review of Studies Reporting Implementation Outcomes

Background Anxiety disorders and depression are frequent conditions in childhood and adolescence. eMental healthcare technologies may improve access to services, but their uptake within health systems is limited. Objective The objective of this review was to examine and describe how the implementation of eMental healthcare technologies for anxiety disorders and depression in children and adolescents has been studied. Methods We conducted a search of 5 electronic databases and gray literature. Eligible studies were those that assessed an eMental healthcare technology for treating or preventing anxiety or depression, included children or adolescents (<18 years), or their parents or healthcare providers and reported findings on technology implementation. The methodological quality of studies was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Outcomes of interest were based on 8 implementation outcomes: acceptability (satisfaction with a technology), adoption (technology uptake and utilization), appropriateness (“fitness for purpose”), cost (financial impact of technology implementation), feasibility (extent to which a technology was successfully used), fidelity (implementation as intended), penetration (“spread” or “reach” of the technology), and sustainability (maintenance or integration of a technology within a healthcare service). For extracted implementation outcome data, we coded favorable ratings on measurement scales as “positive results” and unfavorable ratings on measurement scales as “negative results.” Those studies that reported both positive and negative findings were coded as having “mixed results.” Results A total of 46 studies met the inclusion criteria, the majority of which were rated as very good to excellent in methodological quality. These studies investigated eMental healthcare technologies for anxiety (n=23), depression (n=18), or both anxiety and depression (n=5). Studies of technologies for anxiety evaluated the following: (1) acceptability (78%) reported high levels of satisfaction, (2) adoption (43%) commonly reported positive results, and (3) feasibility (43%) reported mixed results. Studies of technologies for depression evaluated the following: (1) appropriateness (56%) reported moderate helpfulness and (2) acceptability (50%) described a mix of both positive and negative findings. Studies of technologies designed to aid anxiety and depression commonly reported mixed experiences with acceptability and adoption and positive findings for appropriateness of the technologies for treatment. Across all studies, cost, fidelity, and penetration and sustainability were the least measured implementation outcomes. Conclusions Acceptability of eMental healthcare technology is high among users and is the most commonly investigated implementation outcome. Perceptions of the appropriateness and adoption of eMental healthcare technology were varied. Implementation research that identifies, evaluates, and reports on costs, sustainability, and fidelity to clinical guidelines is crucial for making high-quality eMental healthcare available to children and adolescents.

Barriers to and enablers of healthy lifestyle behaviours in adolescents with obesity: a scoping review and stakeholder consultation

Healthy lifestyle behaviours are key to successful weight management, but have proven to be challenging to attain for adolescents with obesity. The purpose of our scoping review was to (i) describe barriers and enablers that adolescents with obesity encounter for healthy nutrition, physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep habits and (ii) identify gaps in the literature. We adhered to established methodology for scoping reviews. Six databases were searched (1980–June 2016) for original articles published in English or French that focused on lifestyle behaviours of 13‐ to 17‐year‐olds in paediatric weight management. Following screening and data extraction, findings of selected articles were synthesized thematically using a social ecological framework. Stakeholder consultation (n = 20) with adolescents with obesity and health professionals was completed to enhance methodological rigour. Our search yielded 17 articles for inclusion, including 546 unique participants. Barriers to healthy nutrition and physical activity were more consistently related to individual‐level and interpersonal‐level factors; enablers tended to be linked with interpersonal‐level factors. Knowledge gaps identified related to sedentary behaviour and sleep as well as environmental and policy levels of influence. Our review revealed that some barriers and enablers were unique to adolescents with obesity, which were either within or beyond their control. These findings highlight the importance of multilevel interventions to enable healthy lifestyle behaviours for weight management.

Which outcomes are important to patients and families who have experienced paediatric acute respiratory illness? Findings from a mixed methods sequential exploratory study

Objectives To identify the outcome priorities of parents of children who had experienced an acute respiratory infection (ARI). Design This was a two-phase, mixed methods study with a sequential exploratory design. We used a cross-sectional quantitative web-based survey to elicit parents’ priorities for paediatric ARI. We then used a discussion moderated via Facebook to elucidate richer descriptions of parents’ priorities. Setting Survey and discussion data were collected via the internet. Participants 110 parents (90% women, median age 35 years, 92.7% urban dwelling, 94.5% with a postsecondary education) with a child who had experienced an ARI responded to the survey. Four parents participated in the Facebook discussion. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary outcome was parents’ rankings of outcomes related to paediatric ARI. The secondary outcomes were the alignment of parent-reported important outcomes with those commonly reported in Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs). Results Commonly reported ARIs included croup (44.5%), wheezing (43.6%) and influenza (38.2%). Parents ranked major complications, illness symptoms and length of stay as the most important outcome categories. With respect to specific outcomes, severe complications, major side effects, doctor’s assessment, relapse, oxygen supplementation and results from laboratory measures were reported as most important (75th–99th percentile). Taking time off work, mild complications, interference with daily activities, treatment costs, absenteeism, follow-up visits and other costs were deemed minimally important (<25th percentile). In 35 Cochrane SRs, 29 unique outcomes were reported. Although participants’ priorities sometimes aligned with outcomes frequently reported in the literature, this was not always true. Additional priorities from the survey (n=50) and Facebook discussions (n=4) included healthcare access, interacting with healthcare providers, education, impact on daily activities and child well-being. Conclusions In the context of paediatric ARI, parents’ priorities did not always align with commonly researched outcomes. Appealing and efficient strategies to engage patients and parents in research should be developed.

Considerations for adaptive design in pediatric clinical trials: study protocol for a systematic review, mixed-methods study, and integrated knowledge translation plan

BackgroundAlthough children have historically been excluded from clinical trials (CTs), many require medicines tested and approved in CTs, forcing health care providers to treat their pediatric patients based on extrapolated data. Unfortunately, traditional randomized CTs can be slow and resource-intensive, and they often require multi-center collaboration. However, an adaptive design (AD) framework for CTs could be used to increase the efficiency of pediatric CTs by incorporating prospectively planned modifications to CT methods without undermining the integrity or validity of the study. There are many possible adaptations, but each will have ethical, logistical, and statistical implications. It remains unclear which adaptations (or combinations thereof) will lead to real-world improvements in pediatric CT efficiency. This study will identify, evaluate, and synthesize the various regulatory, ethical, logistical, and statistical considerations and emerging issues of AD in CTs that could be used to evaluate the use of drugs in children.Methods/designFollowing the development of a peer-reviewed search strategy, a systematic review on AD in CTs will be conducted. Data on regulatory, ethical, logistic, and statistical considerations as well as population and trial design characteristics will be synthesized. A mixed-methods study including surveys and focus groups with regulators, research ethics board members, biostatisticians, clinicians, and scientists, as well as representatives from patient groups and the public will evaluate the opportunities and challenges in applying AD in trials enrolling children and propose recommendations on best practices.DiscussionThis study will deliver practical recommendations on the use of AD in pediatric CTs. Collaboration and consultation with national and global partners will ensure that our results meet the needs of researchers, regulators, and patients, both locally and globally, and that they remain current and relevant by engaging a wide variety of stakeholders. Overall, this research will enrich the knowledge base regarding if, how, and when AD can be used to answer research questions with fewer resources while still meeting the highest ethical standards and regulatory requirements for CTs. In turn, this will result in increased high-quality clinical research needed by health care providers so they have access to appropriate, population-specific evidence regarding the safe and effective use of medicines in children.

When and How Do Brief Alcohol Interventions in Primary Care Reduce Alcohol Use and Alcohol-Related Consequences among Adolescents?

Objective To systematically describe when and how brief alcohol interventions delivered to adolescents in primary care settings reduce alcohol use and alcohol‐related consequences among adolescents, using realist review methodology. Study design Eleven electronic databases, gray literature, and reference screening were searched up to June 2016; 11 brief interventions published in 13 studies met inclusion criteria. Intervention design components (delivery context and intervention mechanisms) underlying brief alcohol interventions for adolescents were extracted and linked to alcohol use and related consequences. Results Brief interventions had either an indicated context of delivery (provided to adolescent patients with low‐to‐moderate risk for alcohol problems) or universal context of delivery (provided to general adolescent patient population). Interventions that used motivational interviewing in an indicated delivery context had 2 potential mechanisms—eliciting and strengthening motivation to change and providing direction through interpretation. These interventions resulted in clinically significant reductions in alcohol use and associated consequences. Peer risk also was identified among universal and indicated brief interventions as a potential mechanism for changing alcohol‐related outcomes among adolescents who received the intervention. None of the studies tested the processes by which interventions were expected to work. Conclusions The current evidence base suggests that both indicated and universal delivery of brief alcohol interventions to adolescents in primary care settings can result in clinically important changes in alcohol‐related outcomes. Studies that test brief intervention processes are now necessary to better understand how brief interventions work with adolescents in primary care settings.