Search

Over the past ten years, the Psychologically Informed Environments (PIEs) framework has become a popular approach to service delivery and practice with people experiencing homelessness. However, there is a dearth of evidence supporting the implementation of this framework, despite anecdotal reports of its utility and effectiveness. This mixed methods systematic review aims to answer the following three questions: 1) What interventions aimed at staff have been used to implement PIE principles in homelessness services? 2) What is the impact of implementing PIE interventions with staff working in homelessness services? 3) What are the barriers and facilitators to implementing PIE approaches in homelessness services?

A diagnosis of cancer in childhood or adolescence has an significant impact on school attendance, educational experience and outcomes. We plan to conduct a scoping review to identify what is known from the existing literature about access to and experience of education for children and adolescents with cancer during and after treatment. We will utilise the six steps outlined by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) including the use of a consultation exercise with healthcare and educational professionals, patients and their families.

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-4-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-4-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-msc-10.1177_09691413221126677 for Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes by Jan Kik, Eveline A.M. Heijnsdijk, Allison R. Mackey, Gwen Carr, Anna M Horwood, Maria Fronius, Jill Carlton, Helen J Griffiths, Inger M Uhlén, Huibert Jan Simonsz and Country-Committees Joint-Partnership of the EUSCREEN Study Consortium in Journal of Medical Screening

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-joo-10.1177_14653125211029959 for Patient reported experiences and treatment outcomes of orthodontic patients treated within secondary care settings in the South West of England during the COVID-19 pandemic by Jenifer L Jopson, Pamela E Ellis, Amelia S Jerreat, Louise C Kneafsey, Matthew B Moore, Christian Day, Julia K Scott, Helen Griffiths, Tara VN Lee, Graham R Oliver, Peter V Fowler, Martyn Sherriff and Anthony J Ireland in Journal of Orthodontics

Additional file 1. PRISMA-P 2015 Checklist. A completed PRISMA-P checklist for the scoping review.

Vision screening in school has long been regarded as an effective way to reduce the prevalence rate of amblyopia induced by strabismus, high refractive error or other causes (Vision in preschool study group, 2003, Solebo, Cumberland & Rahi, 2014, Tailor et al, 2016). Early vision screening can detect the presence of amblyopia whilst it can still be treated, therefore preventing serious permanent visual loss in an early stage of life (Powell and Hatt, 2009). Despite the importance of early detection of amblyopia being indisputable, the format of vision screening varies. The UK National Screening Committee (NSC), based on available evidence (Hall and Elliman, 2003), recommended that children aged 4-5 should receive vision screening (UKNSC, 2019). In 2017, a service specification was published by Public Health England (PHE) to guide local authorities (LA) in commissioning vision screening services (PHE, 2017). The specification provided detailed guidance on the evidence-based practice in providing vision screening services. The PHE specification recommended that the service should be orthoptist led; children with best corrected VA less than 0.200 logMAR, measured by Keeler crowded logMAR test, should be referred. Despite the detailed guidance provided by PHE, the level of adherence ofLA in commissioning vision screening has not yet been revealed.The British and Irish Orthoptics Society (BIOS) Vision Screening Clinical Advisory Group (CAG) is working to improve the quality of vision screening and to ensure best practice across the country. Hence it is paramount to promote the importance of the PHE guideline and to investigate the potential effect it brings. In addition, the 2018-2019 vision screening audit aims at mappingout current practices of vision screening across the UK and Ireland, identify changes in practice from the previous year and the effect of various factors on the effectiveness of vision screening. The intention is for this audit can facilitate the benchmarking of services and provide evidence toaid orthoptists and LAs in making informed decisions regarding vision screening commissioning.

Additional file 2. Draft Search Strategy for Medline. A draft search strategy to be used in the Medline database.

Additional file 4.

Additional file 3: Supplementary Table S1- WHO Trial registry dataset.

Additional file 2. Consent Form.

Additional file 1. Patient Information pack.

Aim: This audit utilises data submitted by Head Orthoptists to the British and Irish Orthoptic Society (BIOS). The aim is to describe vision screening practices across the United Kingdom (UK) for the academic year 2017-2018, compare the findings to the previous audits for academic years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, and to provide evidence for future decision-making. Method: An Excel spreadsheet and guidance for completion was sent to 204 Orthoptic Heads of Service for submission in March 2019. Submitted data was integrated and the information was analysed to identify types of provision and outcomes across sites. Results: Twenty-eight sites (13.7%) responded to the data request, or these twenty-seven provided basic site data including consent policy and age at which tests are performed; a decrease from the previous academic years 2015-2016 (n=52 sites) and 2016-2017 (n=50 sites). Twenty-seven sites provided data on which professional administered screening, the test(s) used and the pass criteria adopted. These twenty-seven sites provided data regarding the referral pathway and twenty-five sites provided data on diagnostic examination and management criteria. Twenty-five sites provided data regarding the number of children screened (n=114,831), of which fifteen sites provided complete ‘accurate’ data on the number of children who failed screening (n=7,060 out of 65,959 screened). These twenty-five sites provided ‘accurate’ data on the number of children who attended their diagnostic follow-up (n=8,569). Eleven sites (n=4,645 children seen) provided data on initial outcomes of the eye examination and sixteen sites (n=2,366 children seen) provided diagnostic test data. The mean coverage increased to 98.3% (2016-2017=93%, 2015-16 =89%). True +ve rates were difficult to compare for each profession delivering screening, because of small numbers of submission with varied practice of test used, referral criteria and number of screens offered to each child. Mean True +ve rates where a second screen was provided in school for children with borderline fail VA were 90% compared to a mean of 71% in sites where no 2nd screen was performed. Improved True +ve rates were also evident in sites who provided a second screen if the child was unable to perform the test. In both instances data relating to the second screening outcomes were limited and require further analysis. Conclusions: This audit concludes that many screening services do not have reliable methods to collect data to assess the effectiveness of the programme. A more effective method for collecting data and consistency in reporting is required to allow comparison and benchmarking of services. Without this, it is not possible to definitively conclude the effectiveness of vision screening, whether the professional delivering screening and type of vision screener training influences True +ve rates. The current limited data suggests that a second screen of children with borderline fail results or unable to perform the test reduces false positive referrals; cost-benefit analysis is required. The implications of these points are discussed.

Aim: This audit utilises data submitted by Head Orthoptists to the British and Irish Orthoptic Society (BIOS). The aim is to attempt to describe vision screening practices across the United Kingdom (UK) for the academic year 2016-2017, compare the findings to the previous vision screening audit for academic year 2015-2016 and provide evidence for future decision-making. Method: Submitted data was integrated into an Excel spreadsheet and the information was analysed to identify the differences between screening programmes across sites. The method of calculating True +ve scores was explored using three methods (as explained in 2015-2016 audit) and the effects of training on True +ve are discussed. Data was deemed ‘accurate’, such as at the analysis of initial outcomes, only if all children seen after referral were accounted for in the initial outcomes section. Results: Fifty sites provided basic data including consent policy and age at which tests are performed; a decrease from the previous academic year 2015-2016 (n=52 sites). Forty-three sites provided data on which professional administered the tests, the test(s) used and the pass criteria adopted. Forty-one sites provided data regarding the referral pathway and forty-three sites provided data on eye exam and management criteria. Forty-two sites provided data regarding the number of children screened (n=162,868), of which thirty sites provided ‘accurate’ data on the number of children who failed screening (n=15,383). Thirty-eight sites provided ‘accurate’ data on the number of children who attended their follow-up (n=10,748). Eighteen sites (n=4,645 children seen) provided data on initial outcomes of the eye examination and sixteen sites (n=4,060 children seen) provided diagnostic test data on the number of True positives (+ve). The mean coverage increased to 93% (2016-2016=89%). Using Method 1 of calculating True +ve: Orthoptic delivered screening (n=1,790) showed a mean True +ve of 89%; Vision Screener (VS) trained by an Orthoptist using the BIOS package (n=608) showed a mean True +ve of 81%; VS trained by an Orthoptist using a local package (n=804) showed a mean True +ve of 71%; and VS not trained by an Orthoptist (n=126) showed a mean True +ve of 59%. Conclusions: This audit concludes that many screening services do not have methods to collect data to assess the effectiveness of the programme. Clarity is needed regarding the meaning of certain terms to achieve consistency in reporting and allow comparison and benchmarking of services, for example, in recording True+ve. Without this, it is not possible to definitively conclude whether professional delivering screening and type of vision screener training does influence True +ve rates or not. The current limited data suggests that the training received/professional administering the test affects the number of True +ve. The implications are discussed.

Aim: This audit utilises data submitted by Head Orthoptists to the British and Irish Orthoptic Society (BIOS). The aim is to provide insights into vision screening practices across the United Kingdom (UK) for the academic year 2015-2016, compare the findings to the previous vision screening audit for academic year 2014-2015 and provide evidence for future decision making regarding best practice. Method: Fifty-nine sites provided data with four instances of site amalgamation. Site representatives were contacted to confirm new area details, duplicated submissions were identified and one submission in each case was used in the analysis. Fifty-two sites remained (number of children screened (n) = 168,239). Thirty-eight sites (n=148,159) provided further screening outcome data. Of these, twenty sites (n=6,101) provided further diagnostic test data on the number of true positives (+ve). The method of calculating True +ve scores was explored and the implications discussed.Results: The number of sites participating in the current BIOS vision screening audit for academic year 2015-2016 increased from the previous academic year (2014-2015) from 56 to 59. This number of 59 reduces to 52 when combined data and duplicated submissions were accounted for. The mean coverage decreased from 91% in the academic year 2014-2015 to 89% in the current audit of academic year 2015-2016.Calculation of mean true +ve for the sites was conducted using three separate methods. Whilst noting methods 1 and 2, this audit focuses on method 3 for interpretation. Sites providing Orthoptic delivered screening (n=3123) showed a mean true +ve of 79%, Vision Screener trained by an Orthoptist using the BIOS package (n=889) showed a mean True +ve of 66%, Vision Screener trained by an Orthoptist using a local package (n= 1452) showed a mean True +ve of 66%, and Vision Screener not trained by an Orthoptist (n=637) showed mean True +ve of 41%.Conclusions: This audit concludes that there is a need for further investigation into the effects of training received on True +ve scores. It suggests that the level of training received/professional administering the test affects the number of True +ve. The implications are discussed.

Differences in lipid metabolism associate with age-related disease development and lifespan. Inflammation is a common link between metabolic dysregulation and aging. Saturated fatty acids (FAs) initiate pro-inflammatory signalling from many cells including monocytes; however, no existing studies have quantified age-associated changes in individual FAs in relation to inflammatory phenotype. Therefore, we have determined the plasma concentrations of distinct FAs by gas chromatography in 26 healthy younger individuals (age < 30 years) and 21 healthy FA individuals (age > 50 years). Linear mixed models were used to explore the association between circulating FAs, age and cytokines. We showed that plasma saturated, poly- and mono-unsaturated FAs increase with age. Circulating TNF-α and IL-6 concentrations increased with age, whereas IL-10 and TGF-β1 concentrations decreased. Oxidation of MitoSOX Red was higher in leucocytes from FA adults, and plasma oxidized glutathione concentrations were higher. There was significant colinearity between plasma saturated FAs, indicative of their metabolic relationships. Higher levels of the saturated FAs C18:0 and C24:0 were associated with lower TGF-β1 concentrations, and higher C16:0 were associated with higher TNF-α concentrations. We further examined effects of the aging FA profile on monocyte polarization and metabolism in THP1 monocytes. Monocytes preincubated with C16:0 increased secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines in response to phorbol myristate acetate-induced differentiation through ceramide-dependent inhibition of PPARγ activity. Conversely, C18:1 primed a pro-resolving macrophage which was PPARγ dependent and ceramide dependent and which required oxidative phosphorylation. These data suggest that a midlife adult FA profile impairs the switch from proinflammatory to lower energy, requiring anti-inflammatory macrophages through metabolic reprogramming.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified >250 loci for body mass index (BMI), implicating pathways related to neuronal biology. Most GWAS loci represent clusters of common, noncoding variants from which pinpointing causal genes remains challenging. Here we combined data from 718,734 individuals to discover rare and low-frequency (minor allele frequency (MAF) < 5%) coding variants associated with BMI. We identified 14 coding variants in 13 genes, of which 8 variants were in genes (ZBTB7B, ACHE, RAPGEF3, RAB21, ZFHX3, ENTPD6, ZFR2 and ZNF169) newly implicated in human obesity, 2 variants were in genes (MC4R and KSR2) previously observed to be mutated in extreme obesity and 2 variants were in GIPR. The effect sizes of rare variants are ~10 times larger than those of common variants, with the largest effect observed in carriers of an MC4R mutation introducing a stop codon (p.Tyr35Ter, MAF = 0.01%), who weighed ~7 kg more than non-carriers. Pathway analyses based on the variants associated with BMI confirm enrichment of neuronal genes and provide new evidence for adipocyte and energy expenditure biology, widening the potential of genetically supported therapeutic targets in obesity.