Search

Background: We evaluated studies published in high-impact psychiatry journals to assess (1) the proportion that reported in articles whether they engaged people with lived experience; (2) the proportion that likely engaged people with lived experience; and, if engagement occurred, (3) stages of research (planning, conduct, interpretation, dissemination); and (4) engagement level (consult, involve, partner). Methods: We searched PubMed on December 14, 2022, for articles in psychiatry journals with impact factor ≥ 10 and reviewed articles in reverse chronological order until 141 were included, based on pre-study precision estimation. We contacted authors to obtain information on engagement. Results: Three of 141 (2%) studies reported engagement of people with lived experience in articles. Of the other 138 studies, 74 authors responded to follow-up emails and 22 reported they engaged people with lived experience but did not report in the article. Depending on assumptions about engagement by non-responders, we estimated, overall, 18-31% of studies may have engaged people with lived experience. Engagement occurred in research planning (70%) and rarely interpretation (35%). Most involved consultation (providing opinions or perspectives, 53%) and few involved partnership (11%). Conclusions: Engagement of people with lived experience in psychiatry research is uncommon, and when it does occur people are typically consulted but not engaged in roles with influence on decision-making. Funding agencies, ethics committees, journals, and academic institutions should take steps to support engagement of people with lived experience in psychiatry research. Plain English summary: Engaging people with lived experience in research is important to ensure research is relevant to people's needs. We do not know, however, how often people with lived experience are engaged in psychiatry research and whether engagement is reported in journal articles. We evaluated studies published in top psychiatry journals and assessed the (1) percentage that reported in the articles whether they engaged people with lived experience and (2) percentage that likely engaged people with lived experience based on author queries. Additionally, if people with lived experience were engaged in the studies, we also evaluated (3) the stages of research that people with lived experience were involved in (planning, conduct, interpretation, dissemination); and (4) their level of influence on decision-making (consult, involve, partner). Articles published in psychiatry journals with impact factor greater than or equal to 10 were eligible. We searched for studies on PubMed, a popular database of medical research, and reviewed articles from most to least recent until 141 were included. We calculated that we needed to review 141 articles to have enough to make reasonably precise estimates (confidence intervals around estimates of 10% or less) of how many studies engaged people with lived experience. We found that 3 of 141 (2%) studies reported on engagement in articles. We contacted authors of studies that did not report on engagement in their articles and asked whether they engaged people with lived experience. Of the 138 articles that did not report on engagement, 74 authors responded to email queries, and 22 reported they engaged people with lived experience. We estimated, overall, 18-31% of studies may have engaged people with lived experience, depending on whether we assumed that non-responders did or did not engage. Among all studies that engaged people with lived experience, both those reported and unreported in the articles, engagement commonly occurred in research planning (N = 14 of 20 studies, 70%) but rarely in the interpretation of results (N = 7 of 20 studies, 35%). Engagement mostly involved consultation, where people with lived experience provided perspectives to researchers (N = 10 of 19 studies, 53%). Few involved partnership, where they worked with researchers to make decisions (N = 2 of 19 studies, 11%). Funding agencies, ethics committees, academic journals, and universities should take steps to support engagement of people with lived experience in psychiatry research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare, chronic autoimmune disorder associated with disability, diminished physical function, fatigue, pain, and mental health concerns. We assessed minimal detectable changes (MDCs) of the Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index (HAQ‐DI), Patient‐Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System‐29 Profile version 2.0 (PROMIS‐29v2.0) domains, and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)‐8 in people with SSc. Methods: Scleroderma Patient‐Centered Intervention Network Cohort participants completed the HAQ‐DI, PROMIS‐29v2.0 domains, and PHQ‐8 at baseline assessments from April 2014 until August 2023. We estimated MDC95 (smallest change that can be detected with 95% certainty) and MDC90 (smallest change that can be detected with 90% certainty) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) generated via the percentile bootstrapping method resampling 1,000 times. We compared MDC estimates by age, sex, and SSc subtype. Results: A total of 2,571 participants were included. Most were female (n = 2,241; 87%), and 38% (n = 976) had diffuse SSc. Mean (±SD) age was 54.9 (±12.7) years and duration since onset of first non‐Raynaud phenomenon symptom was 10.8 (±8.7) years. MDC95 estimate was 0.41 points (95% CI 0.40–0.42) for the HAQ‐DI, between 4.88 points (95% CI 4.72–5.05) and 9.02 points (95% CI 8.80–9.23) for the seven PROMIS‐29v2.0 domains, and 5.16 points (95% CI 5.06–5.26) for the PHQ‐8. MDC95 estimates were not materially different across subgroups. Conclusion: MDC95 and MDC90 estimates were precise and similar across age, sex, and SSc subtype groups. HAQ‐DI MDC95 and MDC90 were substantially larger than previous estimates of HAQ‐DI minimal important difference from several small studies. Minimally important differences of all measures should be evaluated in large studies using anchor‐based methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effectiveness of psychotherapy for depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has been well-established in community samples but its effectiveness in carceral settings is less clear. The present systematic review thus sought to evaluate the effects of psychological therapies for PTSD and depression in incarcerated samples. We searched five databases from inception through January 2023, for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers independently reviewed the study eligibility, extracted the data, assessed the intervention reporting, and evaluated the risk of bias. Eleven RCTs met inclusion criteria, five addressing treatment of PTSD, and six addressing treatment of depression. Interventions produced mixed findings with respect to symptom reduction relative to active controls, with a significant risk of methodological bias in virtually all studies. Of the interventions studied, interpersonal psychotherapy produced the most encouraging, though clearly still tentative results for the treatment of depression. Results highlight the need for increased methodological rigor and additional research to examine the effectiveness of interventions that have yielded positive results in community samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Depression questionnaire cutoffs are calibrated for screening accuracy and not to assess prevalence, but the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) is often used to estimate diagnostic prevalence among older adults, most commonly with scores of ≥ 5. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis to compare depression prevalence based on GDS-15 ≥ 5 to Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (SCID) diagnoses and assessed whether an alternative cutoff could be more accurate. We used generalized linear mixed models to estimate prevalence. Data from 14 studies (3602 participants, 434 SCID major depression) were included. Pooled GDS-15 ≥ 5 prevalence was 34.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27.5–41.6%), and pooled SCID prevalence was 14.8% (95% CI 10.0–21.5%; difference of 17.6%, 95% CI 11.6–23.6%). GDS-15 ≥ 8 provided the closest estimate to SCID with mean difference of − 0.3% (95% prediction interval − 17.0–16.5%). Prevalence estimate differences were not associated with study or participant characteristics. In sum, GDS-15 ≥ 5 substantially overestimated depression prevalence. A cutoff of ≥ 8 was accurate overall, but heterogeneity was too high for implementation in practice. Validated diagnostic interviews should be used to estimate major depression prevalence among older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many individuals with systemic sclerosis (SSc) are at heightened risk for COVID-19 related morbidity and isolation due to interstitial lung disease, frailty, and immunosuppressant use. Minimal research has explored loneliness predictors in individuals with chronic illnesses during COVID-19. This study evaluated moderators of loneliness trajectories in individuals with SSc during COVID-19. Methods: Longitudinal data were analyzed across 30 timepoints from April 2020 to May 2022 from 775 adults in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) COVID-19 Cohort. Hierarchical linear modeling evaluated cross-level moderators of loneliness trajectories, including marital status, baseline number of household members, number of virtual or telephone one-on-one or virtual group conversations, number of hours spent enjoying in-person household conversations or activities, and satisfaction with quality of in-person household conversations (all in the past week). Level-1 moderation analyses assessed effects of conversation, activity, and satisfaction means and slopes over time. Results: Baseline values were not statistically significant moderators of loneliness trajectories. Higher mean (averaged over time) virtual or telephone one-on-one and in-person household conversations, in-person household activity, and in-person household conversation satisfaction were associated with lower loneliness trajectories (ps <.05). The relationship between in-person household conversation satisfaction and loneliness trajectory was statistically significantly but minimally attenuated over time (p <.001). Conclusions: For people with SSc, higher mean conversation, activity, and satisfaction variables were associated with lower levels of loneliness during the pandemic, but changes in these social variables were generally not predictive of changes in loneliness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Disease (SEMCD) scale is widely used, including in systemic sclerosis (SSc). The SEMCD has been validated in SSc, but the metric equivalence of the English and French versions has not been assessed (i.e., whether psychometric properties are equivalent across English and French). Methods: Participants were adults from the Scleroderma Patient-Centered Intervention Network (SPIN) Cohort (N = 2159) who completed baseline measures in English (n = 1473) or French (n = 686) between May 2014 to July 2020. Analyses assessed internal consistency reliability via Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega, convergent validity via Pearson's correlations, structural validity via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and differential item functioning via the Multiple-Indicator Multiple-Cause (MIMIC) model. Results: Internal consistency reliability was high in English (α =.93, ω =.93) and French (α =.92, ω =.93). All correlations between the SEMCD and measures of health outcomes were moderate to large, statistically significant, and in the hypothesized direction in both languages. The CFA demonstrated that the one-factor model of self-efficacy, overall, fit reasonably well (CFI =.96, TLI =.93, SRMR =.03, RMSEA =.14). Standardized factor loadings were large (.76 to.88). Three items displayed statistically significant uniform DIF and all six displayed nonuniform DIF; all DIF was of minimal magnitude. Comparison of unadjusted and DIF-adjusted models indicated that DIF did not meaningfully impact total score (ICC = 0.999, r = 0.999). Conclusion: Scores from English- and French-speaking adults with SSc can be combined for analysis or compared. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Selective reporting of results from only well-performing cut-offs leads to biased estimates of accuracy in primary studies of questionnaire-based screening tools and in meta-analyses that synthesize results. Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) of sensitivity and specificity at each cut-off via bivariate random-effects models (BREMs) can overcome this problem. However, IPDMA is laborious and depends on the ability to successfully obtain primary datasets, and BREMs ignore the correlation between cut-offs within primary studies. Methods: We compared the performance of three recent multiple cut-off models developed by Steinhauser et al., Jones et al., and Hoyer and Kuss, that account for missing cut-offs when meta-analyzing diagnostic accuracy studies with multiple cut-offs, to BREMs fitted at each cut-off. We used data from 22 studies of the accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS; 4475 participants, 758 major depression cases). We fitted each of the three multiple cut-off models and BREMs to a dataset with results from only published cut-offs from each study (published data) and an IPD dataset with results for all cut-offs (full IPD data). We estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each cut-off and the area under the curve. Results: Compared to the BREMs fitted to the full IPD data, the Steinhauser et al., Jones et al., and Hoyer and Kuss models fitted to the published data produced similar receiver operating characteristic curves; though, the Hoyer and Kuss model had lower area under the curve, mainly due to estimating slightly lower sensitivity at lower cut-offs. When fitting the three multiple cut-off models to the full IPD data, a similar pattern of results was observed. Importantly, all models had similar 95% CIs for sensitivity and specificity, and the CI width increased with cut-off levels for sensitivity and decreased with an increasing cut-off for specificity, even the BREMs which treat each cut-off separately. Conclusions: Multiple cut-off models appear to be the favorable methods when only published data are available. While collecting IPD is expensive and time consuming, IPD can facilitate subgroup analyses that cannot be conducted with published data only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient engagement in research is important to ensure research questions address problems important to patients, that research is designed in a way that can effectively answer those questions, and that findings are applicable, relevant, and credible. Yet, patients are rarely involved in the dissemination stage of research. This study explored one way to engage patients in dissemination, through co-presenting research. Methods: Semi-structured, one-on-one, audio-recorded interviews were conducted with researchers and patients who co-presented research at one patient conference (the 2022 Canadian National Scleroderma Conference) in Canada. A pragmatic orientation was adopted, and following verbatim transcription, data were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: Of 8 researchers who were paired with 7 patients, 5 researchers (mean age = 28 years, SD = 3.6 years) and 5 patients (mean age = 45 years, SD = 14.2 years) participated. Researcher and patient perspectives about their experiences co-presenting and how to improve the experience were captured across 4 main categories: (1) Reasons for accepting the invitation to co-present; (2) Degree that co-presenting expectations were met; (3) The process of co-presenting; and (4) Lessons learned: recommendations for co-presenting. Conclusions: Findings from this study suggest that the co-presenting experience was a rewarding and enjoyable way to tailor research dissemination to patients. We identified a patient-centred approach and meaningful and prolonged patient engagement as essential elements underlying co-presenting success. Plain English Summary: Involving patients throughout the entire research process is important to ensure research effectively addresses problems important to patients and that findings are applicable, relevant, and credible. Yet, patients are rarely involved in the dissemination of research. We explored one way to engage patients in dissemination, through co-presenting research. We conducted one-on-one interviews with 5 researchers and 5 patients who co-presented research at a patient conference in Canada. Both researchers and patients indicated that the co-presenting experience was rewarding and enjoyable and a useful way to tailor dissemination to patients. We found that a patient-centred approach and meaningful and prolonged patient engagement were essential elements underlying co-presenting success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient engagement in research is important to ensure research questions address problems important to patients, that research is designed in a way that can effectively answer those questions, and that findings are applicable, relevant, and credible. Yet, patients are rarely involved in the dissemination stage of research. This study explored one way to engage patients in dissemination, through co-presenting research. Methods: Semi-structured, one-on-one, audio-recorded interviews were conducted with researchers and patients who co-presented research at one patient conference (the 2022 Canadian National Scleroderma Conference) in Canada. A pragmatic orientation was adopted, and following verbatim transcription, data were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results: Of 8 researchers who were paired with 7 patients, 5 researchers (mean age = 28 years, SD = 3.6 years) and 5 patients (mean age = 45 years, SD = 14.2 years) participated. Researcher and patient perspectives about their experiences co-presenting and how to improve the experience were captured across 4 main categories: (1) Reasons for accepting the invitation to co-present; (2) Degree that co-presenting expectations were met; (3) The process of co-presenting; and (4) Lessons learned: recommendations for co-presenting. Conclusions: Findings from this study suggest that the co-presenting experience was a rewarding and enjoyable way to tailor research dissemination to patients. We identified a patient-centred approach and meaningful and prolonged patient engagement as essential elements underlying co-presenting success. Plain English Summary: Involving patients throughout the entire research process is important to ensure research effectively addresses problems important to patients and that findings are applicable, relevant, and credible. Yet, patients are rarely involved in the dissemination of research. We explored one way to engage patients in dissemination, through co-presenting research. We conducted one-on-one interviews with 5 researchers and 5 patients who co-presented research at a patient conference in Canada. Both researchers and patients indicated that the co-presenting experience was rewarding and enjoyable and a useful way to tailor dissemination to patients. We found that a patient-centred approach and meaningful and prolonged patient engagement were essential elements underlying co-presenting success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Some individuals with systemic sclerosis (SSc) report positive mental health, despite severe disease manifestations, which may be associated with resilience, but no resilience measure has been validated in SSc. This study was undertaken to assess the validity, reliability, and differential item functioning (DIF) between English‐ and French‐language versions of the 10‐item Connor‐Davidson Resilience Scale (CD‐RISC‐10) in SSc. Methods: Eligible participants were enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient‐centered Intervention Network Cohort and completed the CD‐RISC‐10 between August 2022 and January 2023. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate the CD‐RISC‐10 factor structure and conducted DIF analysis across languages with Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes models. We tested convergent validity with another measure of resilience and measures of self‐esteem and depression and anxiety symptoms. We assessed internal consistency and test–retest reliability using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: A total of 962 participants were included in this analysis. CFA supported a single‐factor structure (Tucker–Lewis index = 0.99, comparative fit index = 0.99, root mean square error of approximation = 0.08 [90% confidence interval (90% CI) 0.07, 0.09]). We found no meaningful DIF. Internal consistency was high (α = 0.93 [95% CI 0.92, 0.94]), and we found that correlations with other measures of psychological functioning were moderate to large (|r| = 0.57–0.78) and confirmed study hypotheses. The scale showed good 1–2‐week test–retest reliability (ICC 0.80 [95% CI 0.75, 0.85]) in a subsample of 230 participants. Conclusion: The CD‐RISC‐10 is a valid and reliable measure of resilience in SSc, with score comparability across English and French versions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (task force) develops evidence-based preventive health care guidelines and knowledge translation (KT) tools to facilitate guideline dissemination and implementation. We aimed to determine practitioners' awareness of task force guidelines and KT tools and explore barriers and facilitators to their use. Methods: The task force's KT team completed annual evaluations using surveys and interviews with primary care providers in Canada from 2014 to 2020, to assess practitioners' awareness and determinants of use of task force guidelines and tools. We transcribed interviews verbatim and double-coded them using a framework analysis approach. Results: A total of 1284 primary care practitioners completed surveys and 183 participated in interviews. On average, 79.9% of participants were aware of the task force's 7 cancer screening guidelines, 36.2% were aware of the other 6 screening guidelines and 18.6% were aware of the 3 lifestyle or prevention guidelines. Participants identified 13 barriers and 7 facilitators to guideline and KT tool implementation; these were consistent over time. Participants identified strategies at the public and patient, provider and health systems levels to improve uptake of guidelines. Interpretation: Canadian primary care practitioners were more aware of task force cancer screening guidelines than its other preventive health guidelines. Over the 6-year period, participants consistently reported barriers to guideline uptake, including misalignment with patient preferences and other provincial or specialty guideline organizations. Further evaluations will assess tailored strategies to address the barriers identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Loneliness has been associated with poorer health‐related quality of life but has not been studied in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). The current study was undertaken to examine and compare the psychometric properties of the English and French versions of the University of California, Los Angeles, Loneliness Scale‐6 (ULS‐6) in patients with SSc during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: This study used baseline cross‐sectional data from 775 adults enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient‐Centered Intervention Network (SPIN) COVID‐19 Cohort. Reliability and validity of ULS‐6 scores overall and between languages were evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), differential item functioning (DIF) through the multiple‐indicator multiple‐cause (MIMIC) model, omega/alpha calculation, and correlations of hypothesized convergent relationships. Results: CFA for the total sample supported the single‐factor structure (comparative fit index [CFI] 0.96, standardized root mean residual [SRMR] 0.03), and all standardized factor loadings for items were large (0.60–0.86). The overall MIMIC model with language as a covariate fit well (CFI 0.94, SRMR 0.04, root mean square error of approximation 0.11). Statistically significant DIF was found for 3 items across language (βitem2 = 0.14, P < 0.001; βitem4 = –0.07, P = 0.01; βitem6 = 0.13, P < 0.001), but these small differences were without practical measurement implications. Analyses demonstrated high internal consistency with no language‐based convergent validity differences. Conclusion: Analyses demonstrated evidence of acceptable reliability and validity of ULS‐6 scores in English‐ and French‐speaking adults with SSc. DIF analysis supported use of the ULS‐6 to examine comparative experiences of loneliness without adjusting for language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Optimal cutoff thresholds are selected to separate 'positive' from 'negative' screening results. We evaluated how depression screening tool studies select optimal cutoffs. Methods: We included studies from previously conducted meta‐analyses of Patient Health Questionnaire‐9, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, or Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale—Depression accuracy. Outcomes included whether an optimal cutoff was selected, method used, recommendations made, and reporting guideline and protocol citation. Results: Of 212 included studies, 172 (81%) attempted to identify an optimal cutoff, and 147 of these 172 (85%) reported one or more methods. Methods were heterogeneous with Youden's J (N = 35, 23%) most common. Only 23 of 147 (16%) studies described a rationale for their method. Rationales focused on balancing sensitivity and specificity without describing why desirable. 131 of 172 studies (76%) identified an optimal cutoff other than the standard; most did not make use recommendations (N = 56; 43%) or recommended using a non‐standard cutoff (N = 53; 40%). Only 4 studies cited a reporting guideline, and 4 described a protocol with optimal cutoff selection methods, but none used the protocol method in the published study. Conclusions: Research is needed to guide how selection of cutoffs for depression screening tools can be standardized and reflect clinical considerations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Common postpartum mental health (PMH) disorders such as depression and anxiety are preventable, but determining individual-level risk is difficult. Aims: To create and internally validate a clinical risk index for common PMH disorders. Method: Using population-based health administrative data in Ontario, Canada, comprising sociodemographic, clinical and health service variables easily collectible from hospital birth records, we developed and internally validated a predictive model for common PMH disorders and converted the final model into a risk index. We developed the model in 75% of the cohort (n = 152 362), validating it in the remaining 25% (n = 75 772). Results: The 1-year prevalence of common PMH disorders was 6.0%. Independently associated variables (forming the mnemonic PMH CAREPLAN) that made up the risk index were: (P) prenatal care provider; (M) mental health diagnosis history and medications during pregnancy; (H) psychiatric hospital admissions or emergency department visits; (C) conception type and complications; (A) apprehension of newborn by child services (newborn taken into care); (R) region of maternal origin; (E) extremes of gestational age at birth; (P) primary maternal language; (L) lactation intention; (A) maternal age; (N) number of prenatal visits. In the index (scored 0–39), 1-year common PMH disorder risk ranged from 1.5 to 40.5%. Discrimination (C-statistic) was 0.69 in development and validation samples; the 95% confidence interval of expected risk encompassed observed risk for all scores in development and validation samples, indicating adequate risk index calibration. Conclusions: Individual-level risk of developing a common postpartum mental health disorder can be estimated with data feasibly collectable from birth records. Next steps are external validation and evaluation of various cut-off scores for their utility in guiding postpartum individuals to interventions that reduce their risk of illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) is the property of CMA Impact Inc. 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.)

Background: Fragility fractures are a major health concern for older adults and can result in disability, admission to hospital and long-term care, and reduced quality of life. This Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (task force) guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on screening to prevent fragility fractures in community-dwelling individuals aged 40 years and older who are not currently on preventive pharmacotherapy. Methods: We commissioned systematic reviews on benefits and harms of screening, predictive accuracy of risk assessment tools, patient acceptability and benefits of treatment. We analyzed treatment harms via a rapid overview of reviews. We further examined patient values and preferences via focus groups and engaged stakeholders at key points throughout the project. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to determine the certainty of evidence for each outcome and strength of recommendations, and adhered to Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE), Guidelines International Network and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP-2) reporting guidance. Recommendations: We recommend "risk assessment–first" screening for prevention of fragility fractures in females aged 65 years and older, with initial application of the Canadian clinical Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) without bone mineral density (BMD). The FRAX result should be used to facilitate shared decision-making about the possible benefits and harms of preventive pharmacotherapy. After this discussion, if preventive pharmacotherapy is being considered, clinicians should request BMD measurement using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the femoral neck, and re-estimate fracture risk by adding the BMD T-score into FRAX (conditional recommendation, low-certainty evidence). We recommend against screening females aged 40–64 years and males aged 40 years and older (strong recommendation, very low-certainty evidence). These recommendations apply to community-dwelling individuals who are not currently on pharmacotherapy to prevent fragility fractures. Interpretation: Risk assessment–first screening for females aged 65 years and older facilitates shared decision-making and allows patients to consider preventive pharmacotherapy within their individual risk context (before BMD). Recommendations against screening males and younger females emphasize the importance of good clinical practice, where clinicians are alert to changes in health that may indicate the patient has experienced or is at higher risk of fragility fracture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to synthesize evidence on (1) the prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders and (2) factors associated with symptoms in systemic sclerosis (SSc). We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and PsycINFO via an ongoing living systematic review with automated monthly searches. We identified 6 eligible studies through March 1, 2023. Based on 3 studies (N = 93 to 345), current or 30-day major depressive disorder prevalence was 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2%, 6%) in a sample of Canadian outpatients (N = 345), 18% (95% CI 12%, 27%) in a study of Indian outpatients (N = 93), 10% (95% CI 4%, 21%) for French patient conference attendees (N = 51), and 29% (95% CI 18%, 42%) for French inpatients (N = 49). Current or 30-day prevalence of any anxiety disorder was 49% (95% CI 36%, 62%) for French conference attendees and 51% (95% CI 38%, 64%) for French inpatients; current or 30-day prevalence of generalized anxiety disorder was 3% for Indian outpatients (95% CI 1%, 9%; N = 93). In 3 studies (N = 114 to 376) that examined factors associated with depressive symptoms, higher education and being married or living as married were associated with lower symptoms and pulmonary involvement, breathing problems, and tender joint counts with higher symptoms; age and disease severity markers were not associated. Only 1 study (N = 114) assessed factors associated with anxiety symptoms and found no statistically significant associations. Limitations included heterogeneous populations and assessment methods, small samples, and substantial risk of bias concerns. Mood and anxiety disorder prevalence appear high in SSc, but estimates vary, and existing studies have important limitations. Future research should assess mood and anxiety prevalence and factors associated with symptoms using large representative samples and validated classification and assessment methods. Review registration: PROSPERO (CRD 42021251339). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Item 10 of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is intended to assess thoughts of intentional self-harm but may also elicit concerns about accidental self-harm. It does not specifically address suicide ideation but, nonetheless, is sometimes used as an indicator of suicidality. The 9-item version of the EPDS (EPDS-9), which omits item 10, is sometimes used in research due to concern about positive endorsements of item 10 and necessary follow-up. We assessed the equivalence of total score correlations and screening accuracy to detect major depression using the EPDS-9 versus full EPDS among pregnant and postpartum women. We searched Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from database inception to October 3, 2018 for studies that administered the EPDS and conducted diagnostic classification for major depression based on a validated semi-structured or fully structured interview among women aged 18 or older during pregnancy or within 12 months of giving birth. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis. We calculated Pearson correlations with 95% prediction interval (PI) between EPDS-9 and full EPDS total scores using a random effects model. Bivariate random-effects models were fitted to assess screening accuracy. Equivalence tests were done by comparing the confidence intervals (CIs) around the pooled sensitivity and specificity differences to the equivalence margin of δ = 0.05. Individual participant data were obtained from 41 eligible studies (10,906 participants, 1407 major depression cases). The correlation between EPDS-9 and full EPDS scores was 0.998 (95% PI 0.991, 0.999). For sensitivity, the EPDS-9 and full EPDS were equivalent for cut-offs 7–12 (difference range − 0.02, 0.01) and the equivalence was indeterminate for cut-offs 13–15 (all differences − 0.04). For specificity, the EPDS-9 and full EPDS were equivalent for all cut-offs (difference range 0.00, 0.01). The EPDS-9 performs similarly to the full EPDS and can be used when there are concerns about the implications of administering EPDS item 10. Trial registration: The original IPDMA was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015024785). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Accurate and complete study reporting allows evidence users to critically appraise studies, evaluate possible bias, and assess generalizability and applicability. We evaluated the extent to which recent studies on depression screening accuracy were reported consistent with Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement requirements. Methods: MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2018 through May 21, 2021 for depression screening accuracy studies. Results: 106 studies were included. Of 34 STARD items or sub‐items, the number of adequately reported items per study ranged from 7 to 18 (mean = 11.5, standard deviation [SD] = 2.5; median = 11.5), and the number inadequately reported ranged from 3 to 17 (mean = 10.1, SD = 2.5; median = 10.0). There were eight items adequately reported, seven partially reported, 11 inadequately reported, and four not applicable in ≥50% of studies; the remaining four items had mixed reporting. Items inadequately reported in ≥70% of studies related to the rationale for index test cut‐offs examined, missing data management, analyses of variability in accuracy results, sample size determination, participant flow, study registration, and study protocol. Conclusion: Recently published depression screening accuracy studies are not optimally reported. Journals should endorse and implement STARD adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differences in disability perception between patients and care providers may impact outcomes. We aimed to explore differences in disability perception between patients and care providers in systemic sclerosis (SSc). We conducted a cross-sectional internet-based mirror survey. SSc patients participating in the online SPIN Cohort and care providers affiliated with 15 scientific societies were surveyed using the Cochin Scleroderma International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-65 questionnaire, including 65 items (from 0 to 10), representing 9 domains of disability. Mean differences between patients and care providers were calculated. Care providers' characteristics associated with a mean difference ≥ 2 of 10 points were assessed in multivariate analysis. Answers were analyzed for 109 patients and 105 care providers. The mean age of patients was 55.9 (14.7) years and the disease duration was 10.1 (7.5) years. For all domains of the ICF-65, care providers' rates were higher than those of patients. The mean difference was 2.4 (1.0) of 10 points. Care providers' characteristics associated with this difference were organ-based specialty (OR = 7.0 [2.3–21.2]), younger age (OR = 2.7 [1.0–7.1]) and following patients with disease duration ≥5 years (OR = 3.0 [1.1–8.7]). We found systematic differences in disability perception between patients and care providers in SSc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to describe the development and preliminary testing of a new scale assessing knowledge about melanoma risk factors and early detection/secondary prevention. Data was drawn from a longitudinal study assessing barriers and facilitators of skin self- examination among patients diagnosed with melanoma. For the current analysis, 191 patients who completed the new 9-item Knowledge About Melanoma Early Detection Scale and other study measures were included. Exploratory factor analysis with were conducted, which identified a robust scale comprised of 6 items with factor loadings ranging from.56 to.81. Higher scores on the Knowledge About Melanoma Early Detection Scale were associated with younger age and more positive attitudes about melanoma prevention, but not with biological sex, education, melanoma stage, or past self-administered and physician-provided skin checks. Further studies are needed to replicate these findings and to further establish the predictive validity of this scale and its usefulness for health research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma; SSc) is a rare autoimmune connective tissue disease. Functional impairment of hands is common. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN)-HAND trial compared effects of offering access to an online self-guided hand exercise program to usual care on hand function (primary) and functional health outcomes (secondary) in people with SSc with at least mild hand function limitations. Methods: The pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group cohort multiple randomized controlled trial was embedded in the SPIN Cohort. Cohort participants with Cochin Hand Function Scale (CHFS) scores ≥ 3 and who indicated interest in using the SPIN-HAND Program were randomized (3:2 ratio) to an offer of program access or to usual care (targeted N = 586). The SPIN-HAND program consists of 4 modules that address (1) thumb flexibility and strength; (2) finger bending; (3) finger extension; and (4) wrist flexibility and strength. The primary outcome analysis compared CHFS scores 3 months post-randomization between participants offered versus not offered the program. Secondary outcomes were CHFS scores 6 months post-randomization and functional health outcomes (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System profile version 2.0 domain scores) 3 and 6 months post-randomization. Results: In total, 466 participants were randomized to intervention offer (N = 280) or usual care (N = 186). Of 280 participants offered the intervention, 170 (61%) consented to access the program. Of these, 117 (69%) viewed at least one hand exercise instruction video and 77 (45%) logged into the program website at least 3 times. In intent-to-treat analyses, CHFS scores were 1.2 points lower (95% CI − 2.8 to 0.3) for intervention compared to usual care 3 months post-randomization and 0.1 points lower (95% CI − 1.8 to 1.6 points) 6 months post-randomization. There were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes. Conclusion: The offer to use the SPIN-HAND Program did not improve hand function. Low offer uptake, program access, and minimal usage among those who accessed the program limited our ability to determine if using the program would improve function. To improve engagement, the program could be tested in a group format or as a resource to support care provided by a physical or occupational therapist. Trial registration: . Registered on February 1, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous research on the depression scale of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) has found that different latent factor models have maximized empirical measures of goodness-of-fit. The clinical relevance of these differences is unclear. We aimed to investigate whether depression screening accuracy may be improved by employing latent factor model-based scoring rather than sum scores. Methods: We used an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) database compiled to assess the screening accuracy of the PHQ-9. We included studies that used the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) as a reference standard and split those into calibration and validation datasets. In the calibration dataset, we estimated unidimensional, two-dimensional (separating cognitive/affective and somatic symptoms of depression), and bi-factor models, and the respective cut-offs to maximize combined sensitivity and specificity. In the validation dataset, we assessed the differences in (combined) sensitivity and specificity between the latent variable approaches and the optimal sum score (⩾10), using bootstrapping to estimate 95% confidence intervals for the differences. Results: The calibration dataset included 24 studies (4378 participants, 652 major depression cases); the validation dataset 17 studies (4252 participants, 568 cases). In the validation dataset, optimal cut-offs of the unidimensional, two-dimensional, and bi-factor models had higher sensitivity (by 0.036, 0.050, 0.049 points, respectively) but lower specificity (0.017, 0.026, 0.019, respectively) compared to the sum score cut-off of ⩾10. Conclusions: In a comprehensive dataset of diagnostic studies, scoring using complex latent variable models do not improve screening accuracy of the PHQ-9 meaningfully as compared to the simple sum score approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Families First parenting program is a 10-week paraprofessional-administered adaptation of the Positive Discipline in Everyday Parenting program for West Java, Indonesia. It has not been tested in a randomized controlled trial. The objective was to evaluate the effects of Families First on physical and emotional punishment. We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial and randomly assigned 20 rural and urban villages in West Java, Indonesia, to intervention or waitlist. Caregivers of children aged 0-7 years in intervention villages received Families First. Between 2017 and 2018, measurements were taken before randomization, immediately post-intervention, and 6 months post-intervention. Primary outcome was presence versus absence of caregiver-reported physical or emotional punishment immediately post-intervention. Intention-to-treat regression models accounted for clustering within villages and were run to compare between groups. Participants and study personnel could not be blinded. There were 374 caregivers in the 10 intervention villages and 362 in the 10 waitlist villages included in the trial and in outcome analyses. The intervention did not result in a lower proportion of intervention families using punishment immediately post-intervention (odds ratio [OR] for physical or emotional punishment immediately post intervention = 1.20 (95% CI 0.79-1.82). There were no significant differences for positive and involved parenting, setting limits, and opinion on discipline, but caregivers in the intervention group had significantly lower odds of using positive discipline (OR = 0.65 (95% CI 0.53-0.80). Families First did not prevent punishment in a setting with low levels of reported punishment but should be tested in a setting with higher levels or among people selected for risk or presence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: More people with rare diseases likely receive disease education and emotional and practical support from peer-led support groups than any other way. Most rare-disease support groups are delivered outside of the health care system by untrained leaders. Potential benefits may not be achieved and harms, such as dissemination of inaccurate information, may occur. Our primary objective was to evaluate the effects of a rare-disease support group leader education program, which was developed collaboratively by researchers, peer support group leaders, and patient organization leaders, compared to waitlist control, on peer leader self-efficacy among scleroderma support group leaders.Methods: The trial was a pragmatic, two-arm partially nested randomised controlled trial with 1:1 allocation into intervention or waitlist control. Eligible participants were existing or candidate peer support group leaders affiliated with a scleroderma patient organization. Leader training was delivered in groups of 5-6 participants weekly for 13 weeks in 60-90 min sessions via the GoToMeeting® videoconferencing platform. The program included 12 general leader training modules and one module specific to scleroderma. Primary outcome was leader self-efficacy, measured by the Support Group Leader Self-efficacy Scale (SGLSS) immediately post-intervention. Secondary outcomes were leader self-efficacy 3 months post-intervention; emotional distress, leader burnout, and volunteer satisfaction post-intervention and 3 months post-intervention; and program satisfaction among intervention participants post-intervention.Results: One hundred forty-eight participants were randomised to intervention (N = 74) or waitlist (N = 74). Primary outcome data were provided by 146 (99%) participants. Mean number of sessions attended was 11.4 (standard deviation = 2.6). Mean program satisfaction score (CSQ-8) was 30.3 (standard deviation = 3.0; possible range 8-32). Compared to waitlist control, leader self-efficacy was higher post-intervention [SGLSS; 16.7 points, 95% CI 11.0-22.3; standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.84] and 3 months later (15.6 points, 95% CI 10.2-21.0; SMD 0.73); leader volunteer satisfaction was significantly higher at both assessments, emotional distress was lower post-intervention but not 3 months later, and leader burnout was not significantly different at either assessment.Conclusions: Peer support group leader education improved leader self-efficacy substantially. The program could be easily adapted for support group leaders in other rare diseases.Trial Registration: NCT03965780 ; registered on May 29, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To inform updated recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care on screening for prostate cancer in adults aged 18 years and older in primary care. This protocol outlines the planned scope and methods for a series of systematic reviews. Methods: Updates of two systematic reviews and a de novo review will be conducted to synthesize the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or digital rectal examination (DRE) (with or without additional information) and patient values and preferences. Outcomes for the benefits of screening include reduced prostate cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, and incidence of metastatic prostate cancer. Outcomes for the harms of screening include false-positive screening tests, overdiagnosis, complications due to biopsy, and complications of treatment including incontinence (urinary or bowel), and erectile dysfunction. The quality of life or functioning (overall and disease-specific) and psychological effects outcomes are considered as a possible benefit or harm. Outcomes for the values and preferences review include quantitative or qualitative information regarding the choice to screen or intention to undergo screening. For the reviews on benefits or harms, we will search for randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized, and controlled studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. For the review on values and preferences, we will search for experimental or observational studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo. For all reviews, we will also search websites of relevant organizations, gray literature, and reference lists of included studies. Title and abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments will be completed independently by pairs of reviewers with any disagreements resolved by consensus or by consulting with a third reviewer. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach will be used to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Discussion: The series of systematic reviews will be used by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to update their 2014 guideline on screening for prostate cancer in adults aged 18 years and older. Systematic review registration This review has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022314407) and is available on the Open Science Framework (osf.io/dm32k). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care on potentially inappropriate prescribing and over-the-counter (OTC) medication use among adults aged 65 years and older in primary care settings. This protocol outlines the planned scope and methods for a systematic review of the benefits and harms and acceptability of interventions to reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions and OTC medication use. Methods: De novo systematic reviews will be conducted to synthesize the available evidence on (a) the benefits and harms of interventions to reduce potentially inappropriate prescriptions and OTC medications compared to no intervention, usual care, or non- or minimally active intervention among adults aged 65 years and older and (b) the acceptability of these interventions or attributes among patients. Outcomes of interest for the benefits and harms review are all-cause mortality, hospitalization, non-serious adverse drug reactions, quality of life, emergency department visits, injurious falls, medical visits, and the number of medications (and number of pills). Outcomes for the acceptability review are the preference for and relative importance of different interventions or their attributes. For the benefits and harms review, we will search MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials. For the acceptability review, we will search MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database for experimental and observational studies with a comparator. Websites of relevant organizations, other grey literature sources, and reference lists of included studies and reviews will be searched. Title and abstract screening will be completed by two independent reviewers using the liberal accelerated approach. Full-text review, data extraction, risk of bias assessments, and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) will be completed independently by two reviewers, with any disagreements resolved by consensus or by consulting with a third reviewer. The GRADE approach will be used to assess the certainty of the evidence for outcomes. Discussion: The results of this systematic review will be used by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care to inform their recommendation on potentially inappropriate prescribing and OTC medication use among adults aged 65 years and older. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO (KQ1: CRD42022302313; KQ2: CRD42022302324); Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/urj4b/). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Informal caregivers provide ongoing assistance to a loved one with a health condition. No studies have compared caregiving intensity and perception of burden across chronic medical conditions. Databases were searched from inception through 11 September 2020 to identify studies that included the Level of Care Index or the Zarit Burden Inventory (ZBI) among caregivers for people with chronic diseases. Pooled mean ZBI scores and 95% confidence intervals by medical condition were calculated using a random effects model and heterogeneity with I2. Ninety-seven included articles reported on 98 unique samples across 21 chronic diseases. No study used the Level of Care Index. Among 12 disease groups with more than one study, heterogeneity was too high (I2 range: 0–99.6%, ≥76.5% in 11 groups) to confidently estimate burden. The percent of studies rated high risk of bias ranged from 0% to 98%, but all external validity items were rated as high-risk in >50% of studies. Findings highlight the need for studies on caregiver burden to improve sampling techniques; better report sampling procedures and caregiver and care recipient characteristics; and develop a standard set of outcomes, including a measure of caregiving intensity. Systematic Review Registration: CRD42017080962 The amount of burden reported by caregivers to loved ones is associated with reduced physical and mental health. We found considerable heterogeneity in perceived burden reported by informal caregivers across different studies within disease groups, which is likely related to methodological issues, including sampling techniques. Health care providers who use research on caregiver burden should assess how representative study samples may be and exercise caution in drawing conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We documented changes in depressive and anxiety symptoms from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic among young adults and investigated whether changes differed across participant characteristics. Data were available in an investigation of 1294 grade 7 students recruited in 1999–2000. For this analysis, we used data collected pre-pandemically in 2017–20 (mean (SD) age = 30.6 (1.0)) and during the pandemic in 2020–21 (mean (SD) age = 33.6 (0.6)). 673 participants with data in both cycles were retained for analysis. Symptoms were measured using the Major Depression Inventory (MDI) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) scale. Standardized mean differences (SMD) of changes in MDI and GAD-7 values between cycles were calculated across participant characteristics. On average, MDI scores increased by 2.1 (95%CI 1.4, 2.8) points during the pandemic from mean 10.5; GAD-7 scores increased by 1.2 (0.8, 1.5) points from mean 4.7. The SMD was 0.24 (0.14, 0.33) for MDI, and 0.24 (0.13, 0.34) for GAD-7. No differences in MDI change scores were observed across participant characteristics. Differences in GAD-7 change scores were observed by mood/anxiety disorder (SMD − 0.31 (− 0.58, − 0.05)), household income (0.24 (0.02, 48)), living with young children (− 0.56 (− 1.23,− 0.05)), and adherence to public health recommendations 0.58 (0.19, 1.03)). Increases in depressive and anxiety symptoms were observed 10–16 months into the COVID-19 pandemic among adults age 32–36. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends that adults 19 to 64 years of age be screened for anxiety disorders, which include a number of disorders not commonly treated in primary care.1 Adding anxiety screening tests, as well as clinician review and interpretation, to an already time-constrained primary care visit takes time away from critical health care tasks, increases administrative burden, and is not likely to benefit patients compared with good standard care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) has significant psychosocial implications. We aimed to evaluate the proportion of participants in a large international SSc cohort who used mental health services in a 3‐month period and to evaluate demographic, psychological, and disease‐specific factors associated with use. Methods: Baseline data of participants enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient‐Centered Intervention Network Cohort were analyzed. We determined the proportion that used mental health services and the source of services in the 3 months prior to enrollment. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with service use. Results: Of the 2319 participants included in the analysis, 417 (18%) used mental health services in the 3 months prior to enrollment. General practitioners were the most common mental health service providers (59%), followed by psychologists (25%) and psychiatrists (19%). In multivariable analysis, mental health service use was independently associated with higher education (odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03‐1.11), smoking (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02‐1.11), being retired (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38‐0.93), having limited SSc (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02‐1.89), and having higher anxiety symptom scores (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.03‐1.06) and lower self‐efficacy scores (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83‐0.97). Variables not significantly associated included age, race, disease manifestations, depression symptom scores, and body image distress. Conclusion: About 18% of participants in a large international cohort received mental health services in a 3‐month period, of whom the majority received these services from a general practitioner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) online hand exercise program (SPIN-HAND), is an online self-help program of hand exercises designed to improve hand function for people with scleroderma. The objective of this feasibility trial was to evaluate aspects of feasibility for conducting a full-scale randomized controlled trial of the SPIN-HAND program. Materials and Methods. The feasibility trial was embedded in the SPIN cohort and utilized the cohort multiple randomized controlled trial (cmRCT) design. In the cmRCT design, at the time of cohort enrollment, cohort participants consent to be assessed for trial eligibility and randomized prior to being informed about trials conducted using the cohort. When trials were conducted in the cohort, participants randomized to the intervention were informed and consented to access the intervention. Participants randomized to control were not informed that they have not received an intervention. All participants eligible and randomized to participate in the trial were included in analyses on an intent-to-treat basis. Cohort participants with a Cochin Hand Function Scale score ≥ 3/90 and an interest in using an online hand-exercise intervention were randomized (1:1 ratio) to be offered as usual care plus the SPINHAND Program or usual care for 3 months. User satisfaction was assessed with semistructured interviews. Results. Of the 40 randomized participants, 24 were allocated to SPIN-HAND and 16 to usual care. Of 24 participants randomized to be offered SPIN-HAND, 15 (63%) consented to use the program. Usage of SPIN-HAND content among the 15 participants who consented to use the program was low; only five (33%) logged in more than twice. Participants found the content relevant and easy to understand (satisfaction rating 8.5/10, N = 6). Automated eligibility and randomization procedures via the SPIN Cohort platform functioned properly. The required technical support was minimal. Conclusions. Trial methodology functioned as designed, and the SPIN-HAND Program was feasibly delivered; however, the acceptance of the offer and use of program content among accepters were low. Adjustments to information provided to potential participants will be implemented in the full-scale SPIN-HAND trial to attempt to increase offer acceptance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: People with systemic sclerosis (SSc) often report substantial burden from appearance changes. We aimed to estimate the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for burden from appearance changes in people with SSc.Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the SCISCIF II study, a cross-sectional survey of 113 patients with SSc from France enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort. Burden from appearance changes was assessed with a self-administered numeric rating scale (0, no burden to 10, maximal burden). Acceptability of the symptom state was assessed with a specific anchoring question. Participants who answered yes were in the group of patients who considered their symptom state as acceptable. The PASS for the burden from appearance changes was estimated with the 75th percentile method.Results: Assessments of burden from appearance changes and answers to the anchoring question were available in 82/113 (73%) participants from the SCISCIF II study. Median age was 55 (IQR 24) years, mean disease duration 9.6 (SD 6.5) years and 32/80 (40%) participants had diffuse cutaneous SSc. The PASS estimate for the burden from appearance changes was 4.8 (95% CI 1.0-7.0) of 10 points.Conclusion: Our study provides a PASS estimate for burden from appearance changes. Our estimate could serve as a binary response criterion to assess the efficacy of treatments targeting burden from appearance changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To support physical activity among people with systemic sclerosis (SSc [scleroderma]), we sought to determine the prevalence and importance of barriers and the likelihood of using possible facilitators. Methods: We invited 1,707 participants from an international SSc cohort to rate the importance of 20 barriers (14 medical, 4 social or personal, 1 lifestyle, and 1 environmental) and the likelihood of using 91 corresponding barrier‐specific and 12 general facilitators. Results: Among 721 respondents, 13 barriers were experienced by ≥25% of participants, including 2 barriers (fatigue and Raynaud's phenomenon) rated "important" or "very important" by ≥50% of participants, 7 barriers (joint stiffness and contractures, shortness of breath, gastrointestinal problems, difficulty grasping, pain, muscle weakness and mobility limitations, and low motivation) by 26–50%, and 4 barriers by <26%. Overall, 23 of 103 facilitators (18 medical‐related) were rated by ≥75% of participants as "likely" or "very likely" to use among those who experienced corresponding barriers. These facilitators focused on adapting exercise (e.g., using controlled, slow movement), taking care of one's body (e.g., stretching), keeping warm (e.g., wearing gloves), and protecting skin (e.g., covering ulcers). Among those participants who had previously tried the facilitator, all facilitators were rated by ≥50% as "likely" or "very likely" to use. Among those participants with the barrier who had not tried the facilitator, only 12 of 103 facilitators were rated by >50% of participants as "likely" or "very likely" to use. Conclusion: Medical‐related physical activity barriers were common and considered important. Facilitators considered as most likely to be used involved adapting exercise, taking care of one's body, keeping warm, and protecting skin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Depression screening tool accuracy studies should be conducted with large enough sample sizes to generate precise accuracy estimates. We assessed the proportion of recently published depression screening tool diagnostic accuracy studies that reported sample size calculations; the proportion that provided confidence intervals (CIs); and precision, based on the width and lower bounds of 95% CIs for sensitivity and specificity. In addition, we assessed whether these results have improved since a previous review of studies published in 2013–2015. Methods: MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2018, through May 21, 2021. Results: Twelve of 106 primary studies (11%) described a viable sample size calculation, which represented an improvement of 8% since the last review. Thirty‐six studies (34%) provided reasonably accurate CIs. Of 103 studies where 95% CIs were provided or could be calculated, seven (7%) had sensitivity CI widths of ≤10%, whereas 58 (56%) had widths of ≥21%. Eighty‐four studies (82%) had lower bounds of CIs <80% for sensitivity and 77 studies (75%) for specificity. These results were similar to those reported previously. Conclusion: Few studies reported sample size calculations, and the number of included individuals in most studies was too small to generate reasonably precise accuracy estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internalized homonegativity results from the acceptance of negative attitudes about one's same-sex orientation, which has negative consequences for the health of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM). We translated the 7-item Reactions to Homosexuality Scale (RHS) to Brazilian Portuguese and assessed its factor structure, validity and reliability. The first step included the translation, back-translation, evaluation, peer review, and pre-testing of the scale. Then, we piloted the scale in two convenience samples of adult Brazilians recruited online during October 2019 and February to March 2020 through advertisements on Grindr and Hornet, respectively. The largest sample was randomly split into two groups for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) then confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Criterion and construct validity were assessed via correlations between scale scores and study variables. A total of 5573 GBM (sample 1: 218; sample 2: 5355) completed the RHS. EFA (N = 2652) yielded two eigenvalues greater than one (Factor 1: 3.5 and Factor 2: 1.1). A one-factor solution provided the most interpretable model based on examination of scree plot and item factor loadings (χ²(14) = 1373.1, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.89; TLI = 0.84; RMSEA = 0.19; SRMS = 0.09). Though one-factor CFA showed moderate fit, freeing errors terms to covary, based on item content and interpretation, significantly improved model fit (χ²(12) = 309.1, p < .001; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.09; SRMR = 0.02). As hypothesized, men who did not self-identify as gay (mean score 17.9 compared to those selfidentifying as gay: 11.8) and men who reported no sex with men in the past 6 months (mean score 12.6 compared to those who reported sex with men: 10.6) scored higher reflecting higher internalized homonegativity. The RHS was effectively translated and validated in Brazilian Portuguese and can be used to evaluate the role of internalized homonegativity on GBM's health, as well as its impact on the uptake of HIV prevention technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: People with systemic sclerosis (scleroderma) face difficulties being physically active. This study identified physical activity barriers and facilitators experienced by people with scleroderma. Materials and methods: We conducted nominal group technique sessions with scleroderma patients who shared physical activity barriers, barrier-specific facilitators, and general facilitators. Participants rated importance of barriers and likelihood of using facilitators from 0 to 10, and indicated whether they had tried facilitators. Barriers and facilitators across sessions were merged to eliminate overlap; edited by investigators, patient advisors, and clinicians; and categorized using qualitative content analysis. Results: We conducted 9 sessions (n=41 participants) and initially generated 181 barriers, 457 barrierspecific facilitators, and 20 general facilitators. The number of consolidated barriers (barrier-specific facilitators in parentheses) per category were: 14 (61) for health and medical; 4 (23) for social and personal; 1 (3) for time, work, and lifestyle; and 1 (4) for environmental. There were 12 consolidated general facilitators. The consolidated items with ≥ 1/3 of participants' ratings ≥-8 were: 15 barriers, 69 barrier-specific facilitators, and 9 general facilitators. Conclusions: Scleroderma patients reported many barriers related to health and medical aspects of scleroderma and several barriers in other categories. They reported facilitators to remain physically active despite the barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Selectively reported results from only well‐performing cutoffs in diagnostic accuracy studies may bias estimates in meta‐analyses. We investigated cutoff reporting patterns for the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9; standard cutoff 10) and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS; no standard cutoff, commonly used 10–13) and compared accuracy estimates based on published cutoffs versus all cutoffs. Methods: We conducted bivariate random effects meta‐analyses using individual participant data to compare accuracy from published versus all cutoffs. Results: For the PHQ‐9 (30 studies, N = 11,773), published results underestimated sensitivity for cutoffs below 10 (median difference: −0.06) and overestimated for cutoffs above 10 (median difference: 0.07). EPDS (19 studies, N = 3637) sensitivity estimates from published results were similar for cutoffs below 10 (median difference: 0.00) but higher for cutoffs above 13 (median difference: 0.14). Specificity estimates from published and all cutoffs were similar for both tools. The mean cutoff of all reported cutoffs in PHQ‐9 studies with optimal cutoff below 10 was 8.8 compared to 11.8 for those with optimal cutoffs above 10. Mean for EPDS studies with optimal cutoffs below 10 was 9.9 compared to 11.8 for those with optimal cutoffs greater than 10. Conclusion: Selective cutoff reporting was more pronounced for the PHQ‐9 than EPDS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Where people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) (or scleroderma) obtain diet and nutrition information to manage their disease is not known. Objectives were to identify 1) resources used by people with SSc for nutrition and diet information and 2) perceived advantages and disadvantages of resources. Methods: We conducted nominal group technique (NGT) sessions in which people with SSc reported nutrition and diet information resources they have used and perceived advantages and disadvantages of accessing and using resources. Participants indicated whether they had tried each resource. They rated helpfulness and importance of possible advantages and disadvantages. Items elicited across sessions were merged to eliminate overlap. Results: We conducted four NGT sessions (three English language, one French language; 15 total participants) and identified 33 unique information resources, 147 resource‐specific advantages, and 118 resource‐specific disadvantages. Resource categories included health care providers, alternative and complementary practitioners, websites and other media platforms, events, and print materials. The most common themes for advantages and disadvantages included quality and individualization of information and accessibility of resources in terms of cost, location, and comprehensibility. Information provided by medical professionals was regarded as most credible and can be obtained through books, articles, and websites if individual consultation is not easily accessible. Web‐based information was considered highly accessible, although of variable credibility. In‐person events may be an important source of health information for people with SSc. Conclusion: People with SSc obtain nutrition and diet information from multiple resources. They seek credible and accessible resources that provide SSc‐specific and individualized information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Internalized homonegativity results from the acceptance of negative attitudes about one's same-sex orientation, which has negative consequences for the health of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM). We translated the 7-item Reactions to Homosexuality Scale (RHS) to Brazilian Portuguese and assessed its factor structure, validity and reliability. The first step included the translation, back-translation, evaluation, peer review, and pre-testing of the scale. Then, we piloted the scale in two convenience samples of adult Brazilians recruited online during October 2019 and February to March 2020 through advertisements on Grindr and Hornet, respectively. The largest sample was randomly split into two groups for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) then confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Criterion and construct validity were assessed via correlations between scale scores and study variables. A total of 5573 GBM (sample 1: 218; sample 2: 5355) completed the RHS. EFA (N = 2652) yielded two eigenvalues greater than one (Factor 1: 3.5 and Factor 2: 1.1). A one-factor solution provided the most interpretable model based on examination of scree plot and item factor loadings (X2(14) = 1373.1, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.89; TLI = 0.84; RMSEA = 0.19; SRMS = 0.09). Though one-factor CFA showed moderate fit, freeing errors terms to covary, based on item content and interpretation, significantly improved model fit (X2(12) = 309.1, p < .001; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.09; SRMR = 0.02). As hypothesized, men who did not self-identify as gay (mean score 17.9 compared to those selfidentifying as gay: 11.8) and men who reported no sex with men in the past 6 months (mean score 12.6 compared to those who reported sex with men: 10.6) scored higher reflecting higher internalized homonegativity. The RHS was effectively translated and validated in Brazilian Portuguese and can be used to evaluate the role of internalized homonegativity on GBM's health, as well as its impact on the uptake of HIV prevention technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many people with scleroderma rely on peer-led support groups as a coping resource. Reasons for not attending support groups in scleroderma have been investigated only in North American participants. This study assesses reasons for nonattendance in European countries and compares results with previously published North American findings. The same 21-item survey as used in the North American sample assessed possible reasons for not attending scleroderma support groups. Proportions of items rated Important or Very Important were compared between samples. Consistent with the North American survey findings (N = 242), the two items most commonly rated as (Very) Important reasons for nonattendance among 228 European participants were (1) already having enough support (57%), and (2) not knowing of any local scleroderma support groups (58%). Compared to North American non-attenders, European patients were significantly more likely to rate not knowing enough about what happens at support groups (46% vs 19%), not having reliable ways to get to meetings (35% vs 17%), and being uncomfortable sharing experiences with a group (22% vs 11%) as (Very) Important reasons for nonattendance. Improving access to European support groups, providing education about support groups and group leader training may encourage participation. Rehabilitation professionals might help develop local support groups for people with systemic sclerosis (scleroderma) to address the lack of access to these groups for many patients. The need for transportation and limited local accessibility may also be addressed by implementing online systemic sclerosis support groups. Professionals in the field of rehabilitation may work with people with systemic sclerosis and patient organizations to provide education about support groups to improve support group attendance in Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]