Search

Background: The psychological therapies service (PTS) in the Northern Health and Social Care Trust, in Northern Ireland, provides therapies to adults with moderate or severe mental health difficulties. Psychometric outcomes data are routinely collected to assess if a patient demonstrates significant improvement in their main presenting problem area following therapy. The wider impact of therapy is not fully measured in the outcomes database as this would be disproportionately burdensome for both patient and therapist. The present study, to our knowledge, is the first to use data linkage to link patient therapy outcomes data with prescriptions data. Aims: To widen our understanding of patient medication use before and after therapy. Method: Using Health and Care Number as a unique identifier, the Psychological Therapies Service – Routine Outcome Measurement Database (n = 3625) and data from 72 500 controls were linked with data from the Enhanced Prescribing Database (EPD). The EPD data were sourced from the Honest Broker Service. Results: Key findings from the study were: (a) the odds of PTS clients using antipsychotics in the year before therapy were 25 times greater compared with controls (odds ratio (OR) = 24.53, 95% CI 20.16–29.84); (b) in the 1st year post discharge, PTS clients who clinically improved post therapy discharge were more likely than 'non-engagers' and 'non-improvers' to come off antianxiety medication (OR = 0.61, 95%, CI 0.38–0.98); and (c) therapy did not have an impact on antidepressant use. Conclusions: The results highlight the need for discussion between therapy services, GPs and psychiatry about whether more engagement and collaboration is needed to plan phased reduction in medication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Globally, children are legally obliged to attend school at a certain age (ranging from 4 to 7 years old). Developmental differences are rarely considered at school entry nor are they always reflected in the teaching and learning environment. Children who start school without being ready to cope may be significantly disadvantaged. Failure at school can impact directly on long‐term outcomes such as unemployment, crime, adolescent pregnancy, and psychological and physical morbidity in adulthood. In contrast, experiencing success at school can impact positively on a child's self esteem, behaviour, attitude, and future outcomes. School readiness interventions aim to prepare a child for the academic content of education and the psychosocial competencies considered important for learning such as self‐regulation, listening, following instructions and learning to share in play and other social settings. There is a need for evidence of the effectiveness of centre‐based school readiness interventions. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of centre‐based interventions for improving school readiness in preschool children. Search Methods: In October 2021 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, ERIC, eight additional databases and three trials registers. Other eligible studies were identified through handsearches of reference lists, reports, reviews and relevant websites. Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐RCTs comparing centre‐based school readiness interventions to no intervention, wait‐list control or treatment as usual (TAU) for children (aged three to 7 years before starting compulsory education). The primary outcomes were school readiness and adverse effects. Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Main Results: We included data from 32 trials involving 16,899 children (6590 included in at least one meta‐analysis). Four studies compared centre‐based early education interventions with no treatment controls. Twenty‐two trials compared an enriched school curriculum to treatment as usual (TAU). Children were aged between 3 and 7 years old (mean age 4.4 years), 51.7% were boys and at least 70% were from a racial/ethnic minority group. Most studies were conducted in the USA and mainly located in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. Interventions were delivered in centre‐based settings (pre‐kindergarten or elementary schools), for at least one half day, 4 days per week over the academic year. Follow‐up ranged from up to 1 year (short‐term), 1–2 years (medium‐term) and over 2 years (long‐term). We judged the certainty of evidence to be very low to moderate across all outcome measures. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical heterogeneity. Most studies were considered to be low or unclear risk for selection, detection, performance, attrition, selective reporting, and other bias. Allocation bias was at high risk in 10 studies. The US federal government funded most of the studies. Comparison 1. Centre‐based early education interventions for improving school readiness versus no intervention Cognitive development. There may be little to no difference in cognitive development between centre‐based early education interventions and no intervention at long‐term follow‐up (MD: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.23 to 6.34; p = 0.04; 2 studies, 361 participants; low certainty evidence). Emotional well‐being and social competence. There may be no clear difference in social skills in centre‐based early education interventions compared to the no intervention control group at short‐term follow‐up (SMD: −0.11, 95% CI: −0.54 to 0.33; p = 0.63; 3 studies, 632 participants; low certainty evidence). Heterogeneity for this outcome was substantial (I² = 71%). Health development. Narrative analysis from a single study showed that centre‐based early education interventions may improve health development outcomes such as health checks, immunisation compliance and dental care (1 study, 142 participants; low certainty evidence). None of the studies reported on school readiness, adverse effects, or physical development. Comparison 2. Centre‐based early education interventions for improving school readiness versus TAU School readiness. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of centre‐based early education interventions compared to TAU on school readiness up to 1 year post‐intervention (SMD: 1.17, 95% CI: −0.61 to 2.95; p = 0.20; 2 studies, 374 participants; very low certainty evidence). Heterogeneity for this outcome was considerable (I² = 95%). Cognitive development. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on cognitive development between centre‐based early education interventions and TAU at long‐term follow‐up (MD: 9.34, 95% CI: −6.64 to 25.32; p = 0.25; 2 studies, 136 participants; very low certainty evidence). Heterogeneity for this outcome was considerable (I² = 92%). Emotional well‐being and social competence. A meta‐analysis of 12 studies demonstrated there may be little to no difference in social skills between centre‐based early education interventions and TAU at short‐term follow‐up (SMD: 0.11, 95% CI: −0.05 to 0.28; p = 0.19; 12 studies, 4806 participants; low certainty evidence). Physical development. Evidence from one study showed that centre‐based early education interventions likely have little to no difference in increasing fine motor skills compared to TAU at short‐term follow‐up (MD: 0.80, 95% CI: −1.11 to 2.71; 1 study, 334 participants; moderate certainty evidence). None of the studies measured adverse effects or health development. Authors' Conclusions: We found very low, low and moderate‐certainty evidence that centre‐based interventions convey little to no difference to children starting school compared to no intervention or TAU, up to 1 year. More research, measuring relevant outcomes, conducted outside the USA, is required to improve programmes designed to meet the needs of children starting school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coercive control and related research have progressed significantly in the past number of years, with an ever-growing evidence base adding to its construct. However, currently there is a lack of evidence on young people's knowledge and understanding of coercive control. We included a module of questions in the 2020 Northern Ireland Young Life and Life and Times survey (n = 2,069) with the aim of capturing baseline measurable data on understanding of coercive control within intimate relationships among 16-year olds. Only 16% (n = 325) of respondents had heard of the term coercive control and knew what it meant. Findings also revealed that females, compared to males, were less likely to have heard of coercive control. When the victim being subjected to the behaviours was portrayed as female as opposed to male there was stronger recognition of the associated risks, need for support, and the seriousness of the situation. Our study findings call to question young people's knowledge of unhealthy intimate relationship behaviours beyond blatant and deliberate acts of harm such as those described in the coercive control scenarios. Gender disparities in awareness of coercive control across the study sample also give cause for concern given the increased risk of intimate partner violence among women and girls as well as lower reporting and help seeking among male victims. Results solidify the necessity for dedicated preventative and intervention efforts which focus on intimate relationships and reflect the diverse needs and experiences of young people. Supporting young people to act on their own behalf is an important step change to empowerment within their own intimate relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coercive control is characterised by negative behaviours which intimidate, threaten, and humiliate a person or restrict a person's liberty. In addition to being a known risk factor for experiencing other forms of violence, research has linked coercive control to symptoms of psychological distress and suicidality. In the UK, coercive and controlling behaviours within intimate and familial relationships have been legislated as offending behaviours. However, there still exists a lack of international evidence on wider public knowledge and understanding of coercive control. The Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey (NILT) is an annual cross-sectional representative survey of social policy topics. Participants are adults aged 18 years or over. Concerning coercive control, respondents were presented with two relationship scenarios: obvious and less obvious coercive control. Following each scenario, respondents indicated their level of agreement to ten statements covering attitudes towards coercive control, victims of coercive control, talking about coercive control, and whether coercive control is a crime. Respondents indicated whether they had heard of the term 'coercive control'. Predictors of coercive control awareness were assessed using multinomial logistic regression. Mixed analysis of variance assessed if agreement levels to the ten statements varied by type of coercive control and victim gender. Most respondents said that they had heard of the term coercive control and knew what it meant. Those who had not heard of coercive control at all were more likely to be on a lower income, less qualified and younger, when compared to those who said they knew what the term meant. Significant interactions between coercive control type and victim gender were evident for all ten statements. While most respondents are aware of the term coercive control, a significant number have not and are therefore unlikely to recognise the signs of this type of abuse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Psychotraumatology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The longitudinal Belfast Youth Development Study (BYDS) followed a group of young people from age 11 to 21 years (from 2001 to 2011), charting their experiences of substance use, offending, education, and peer and family relationships. This allowed the investigation of risk and protective factors associated with different types of behavioural patterns and outcomes in adolescence and emerging adulthood. A feasibility study was carried out from 2018 to 2019 to test the success rate of electronically tracing 4,195 participants after almost a decade, in anticipation of carrying out an additional wave of data collection. The projected trace rate obtained using standard and forensic electronic tracing methods was considerably higher (86%) than traditional tracing methods (10%) for getting up-to-date contact details on participants. The electronic tracing methods were also cheaper (£9.72 per person traced) than traditional tracing methods (£20.62 per person traced). These findings will help maximise the potential of longitudinal social research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]