Search

Children whose parents have a mental illness are much more likely to experience mental health problems and other adverse long‐term impacts. Child‐centred psychosocial interventions can be effective, but not much is known about how to design and implement them in different settings. A pre‐post, mixed methods, single‐arm evaluation of a co‐designed social support intervention with parents and children (4–18 years) measured parents' mental health (PHQ‐9), perceived social support (ENRICHD), parental self‐efficacy (PSAM) and children's mental health (SDQ), quality of life (Kidscreen‐27), and child service use (CAMHSRI‐EU) at baseline and 6 months. Qualitative data were gathered at 6 months to explore parents' and children's experience with the intervention. Twenty‐nine parents and 21 children completed baseline and follow‐up questionnaires; 22 parents and 17 children participated in interviews. Parents' depression (MD −1.36, SD 8.08), perceived social support (MD 1, SD 5.91), and children's mental health potentially improved, and children's service use and costs potentially reduced (€224.6 vs. €122.2, MD 112.4). Parental self‐efficacy was potentially reduced (MD −0.11, SD 3.33). The sample was too small to perform statistical analysis. Favourable themes emerged describing the high satisfaction with the intervention, parents' improved understanding of the impact of their mental health problems on children, and improvements in parent–child relationships. This study contributes to an emerging evidence base for co‐designed child‐centred interventions to prevent the transgenerational transmission of poor mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Becoming a parent, while often perceived as a joyous event, can also be a vulnerable life transition, with approximately one in five mothers experiencing perinatal mental illness. Peer support is recommended for its preventive and therapeutic benefits. However, relevant program components of perinatal mental health peer support remain to be identified. Objectives: This review aims to (1) identify peer support programs in perinatal mental health through existing reviews and to (2) synthesize the components of these programs. Methods: A systematic literature review guided by PRISMA was conducted searching four databases, supplemented by hand searches. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist facilitated the systematic extraction and synthesis of program components. Results: Eleven peer support programs were identified from three reviews, largely conducted in English-speaking countries. The identified reviews highlight the benefits of peer support in perinatal mental health. Key components of individual programs were contextual background, materials, provider training and support, delivery modes and locations, and evaluation. Sharing lived experience and providing flexible support were central to all programs. Conclusion: Aspects of flexibility, authenticity and the challenges of program evaluation in peer support must be considered. Findings can now inform future planning and implementation efforts of peer support programs in periantal mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women globally, with an incidence of approximately two million cases in 2018. Organised age-based breast cancer screening programs were established worldwide to detect breast cancer earlier and to reduce mortality. Currently, there is substantial anticipation regarding risk-adjusted screening programs, considering various risk factors in addition to age. The present study investigated the discriminatory accuracy of breast cancer risk prediction models and whether they suit risk-based screening programs. Methods. Following the PICO scheme, we conducted an overview of reviews and systematically searched four databases. All methodological steps, including the literature selection, data extraction and synthesis, and the quality appraisal were conducted following the 4-eyes principle. For the quality assessment, the AMSTAR 2 tool was used. Results. We included eight systematic reviews out of 833 hits based on the prespecified inclusion criteria. The eight systematic reviews comprised ninety-nine primary studies that were also considered for the data analysis. Three systematic reviews were assessed as having a high risk of bias, while the others were rated with a moderate or low risk of bias. Most identified breast cancer risk prediction models showed a low prognostic quality. Adding breast density and genetic information as risk factors only moderately improved the models' discriminatory accuracy. Conclusion. All breast cancer risk prediction models published to date show a limited ability to predict the individual breast cancer risk in women. Hence, it is too early to implement them in national breast cancer screening programs. Relevant randomised controlled trials about the benefit-harm ratio of risk-adjusted breast cancer screening programs compared to conventional age-based programs need to be awaited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Forms of collaborative knowledge production, such as community‐academic partnerships (CAP), have been increasingly used in health care. However, instructions on how to deliver such processes are lacking. We aim to identify practice ingredients for one element within a CAP, a 6‐month co‐design process, during which 26 community‐ and 13 research‐partners collaboratively designed an intervention programme for children whose parent have a mental illness. Using 22 published facilitating and hindering factors for CAP as the analytical framework, eight community‐partners reflected on the activities which took place during the co‐design process. From a qualitative content analysis of the data, we distilled essential practices for each CAP factor. Ten community‐ and eight research‐partners revised the results and co‐authored this article. We identified 36 practices across the 22 CAP facilitating or hindering factors. Most practices address more than one factor. Many practices relate to workshop design, facilitation methods, and relationship building. Most practices were identified for facilitating 'trust among partners', 'shared visions, goals and/or missions', 'effective/frequent communication', and 'well‐structured meetings'. Fewer practices were observed for 'effective conflict resolution', 'positive community impact' and for avoiding 'excessive funding pressure/control struggles' and 'high burden of activities'. Co‐designing a programme for mental healthcare is a challenging process that requires skills in process management and communication. We provide practice steps for delivering co‐design activities. However, practitioners may have to adapt them to different cultural contexts. Further research is needed to analyse whether co‐writing with community‐partners results in a better research output and benefits for participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]