Quantifying the effect of interpregnancy maternal weight and smoking status changes on childhood overweight and obesity in a UK population-based cohort.

BACKGROUND: Maternal preconception and pregnancy exposures have been linked to offspring adiposity. We aimed to quantify the effect of changes in maternal weight and smoking status between pregnancies on childhood overweight/obesity (≥ 85th centile) and obesity (≥ 95th centile) rates in second children. METHODS: Records for 5612 women were drawn from a population-based cohort of routinely collected antenatal healthcare records (2003-2014) linked to measured child body mass index (BMI) age 4-5 years. We applied the parametric G-formula to estimate the effect of hypothetical changes between pregnancy-1 and pregnancy-2 compared to the natural course scenario (without change) on child-2 BMI. RESULTS: Observed overweight/obesity and obesity in child-2 at age 4-5 years were 22.2% and 8·5%, respectively. We estimated that if all mothers started pregnancy-2 with BMI 18·5-24·9 kg/m² and all smokers stopped smoking, then child-2 overweight/obesity and obesity natural course estimates of 22.3% (95% CI 21.2-23.5) and 8·3% (7·6-9·1), would be reduced to 18.5% (17.4-19.9) and 6.2% (5.5-7.0), respectively. For mothers who started pregnancy-1 with BMI 18·5-24·9 kg/m², if all smokers stopped smoking, child-2 overweight/obesity and obesity natural course estimates of 17.3% (16.0-18.6) and 5·9% (5·0-6·7) would be reduced to 16.0% (14.6-17.3) and 4·9% (4·1-5·7), respectively. For mothers who started pregnancy-1 with BMI ≥30 kg/m², if BMI was 18·5-24·9 kg/m² prior to pregnancy-2, child-2 overweight/obesity and obesity natural course estimates of 38.6% (34.7-42.3) and 17·7% (15·1-20·9) would be reduced to 31.3% (23.8-40.0) and 12.5 (8.3-17.4), respectively. If BMI was 25.0-29.9 kg/m² prior to pregnancy-2, these estimates would be 34.5% (29.4-40.4) and 14.6% (11.2-17.8), respectively. CONCLUSION: Interventions supporting women to lose/maintain weight and quit smoking between pregnancies could help reduce rates of overweight/obesity and obesity in second children. The most effective interventions may vary by maternal BMI prior to the first pregnancy.

The impact of food aid interventions on food insecurity, diet quality and mental health in households with children in high-income countries: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Households with children accessing food aid in high-income countries are often food insecure. We aimed to review the evidence on food aid interventions in households with children and impact on food insecurity, diet quality and mental health. DESIGN: A systematic search was conducted using Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Articles published from January 2008 to July 2022 including cross-sectional, cohort and interventional studies in high-income countries were eligible. SETTING: Food aid is defined as the use of interventions providing free food items by community and/or charitable organisations. PARTICIPANTS: Two-parent, lone parent or households with a primary caregiver with at least one child ≤ 18 years. RESULTS: From a total of 10 394 articles, nine were included. Food banks, mobile pantry combined with a free meal for children, backpack provision during school term and food parcel home delivery interventions were evaluated. Food bank models offering additional support such as community programmes, health and social services, cooking classes and free meals for children, client-choice-based models and programmes providing convenient access were associated with improved food security and diet quality (increased intake of wholegrains, fruit and vegetables). One study reported an improvement in mental health and food bank access at the end of 18 months but not at earlier timepoints and one study reported no change in parents' mental health. CONCLUSIONS: Accessing food aid was linked to improved diet quality and reduced food insecurity in some studies. Allowing clients to choose food items and providing support services were most effective.

Long COVID and Health Inequalities: What's Next for Research and Policy Advocacy?

INTRODUCTION: Organised by the 'Qualitative Long Covid Network', a workshop for qualitative Long COVID (LC) researchers, LC charity representatives and people with LC took place in June 2023, where research on the intersectional inequalities affecting LC prevalence, recognition and care was shared and discussed. METHODS: Five key themes were drawn up from presentations, discussions and reflections during the workshop, which are presented in this study. RESULTS: The following five themes are discussed: the unfairness of LC, difficulties in accessing care, mistrust of the healthcare system, a lack of understanding of LC and experiences of stigma and discrimination. Factors that widen or narrow inequalities related to LC were identified. CONCLUSION: A call to action is proposed to investigate and address inequalities through a robust LC research agenda that speaks with conviction to policy and decision-makers. We argue that there needs to be a strong investment in research and evidence-based policy and practice to mitigate the worst effects of the condition and address the inequalities in experience, treatment and support, which are experienced more often and more acutely by some of society's most vulnerable and disadvantaged individuals. PATIENT AND PUBLIC (PPI) CONTRIBUTION: Projects included in this article had PPI ongoing activity to inform their research. A member of the CONVALESCENCE PPI group presented at the QLC Network 'Long Covid and Health Inequalities' workshop, as did members of Long COVID Kids, Long COVID Support and Long COVID SOS charities. They were all invited to be co-authors of this article.

Misaligned or misheard? Physical activity and healthy eating messaging to ethnic minority communities during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study and scoping review.

This mixed-methods study identified physical activity (PA) and healthy eating messages produced during the COVID-19 pandemic and explored how they were received by UK ethnic minority communities. A scoping review of research and grey literature identified categories of PA and healthy eating messaging targeted at ethnic minorities. Individual and group interviews were conducted, audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. There was active community engagement in all study phases to ensure relevance and co-production of findings. Interviews were held with 41 study participants aged 18-86 years (20 men) residing in England and Wales using digital conferencing and in person. The scoping review identified 24 records containing messages grouped into three categories: 1) PA messages; 2) healthy eating messages; 3) risk messages. Five themes described participants' views of these messages: 1) lack of awareness of messaging; 2) responses to PA messaging; 3) responses to healthy eating messaging; 4) perceptions of risk messaging and 5) perceptions of conflict in messages. The review revealed that physical activity and healthy eating messaging specifically targeting ethnic minority communities is limited. This limited messaging was almost entirely missed by these communities. When received, the messaging was not interpreted as intended, perceived to be conflicting and risk messaging was perceived as blaming. More work with ethnic minority communities needs to be done to co-produce meaningful and appropriate PA and healthy eating messaging in a timely manner.

What Does 'Preconception Health' Mean to People? A Public Consultation on Awareness and Use of Language.

INTRODUCTION: There is growing scientific and policy recognition that optimising health before a potential pregnancy (preconception health) improves reproductive outcomes and the lifelong health of future children. However, public awareness on this topic is low. We conducted a public consultation to develop language recommendations and identify and prioritise approaches to inform research and improve public awareness of preconception health. METHODS: A public consultation was undertaken with people of any gender aged 18-50 years living in the United Kingdom who were not currently expecting a child. Public contributors were recruited through patient and public involvement, community and support groups, an existing cohort study, and an LGBTQ+ charity. An initial round of online group discussions (February/March 2021) explored public contributors' knowledge of preconception health, their recommendations for appropriate language, and ideas about public health approaches. In a subsequent discussion round (May 2021), language recommendations were refined and suggested approaches prioritised. Discussions were summarised based on notes taken by two researchers. RESULTS: Fifty-four people joined the initial discussion round (66% women, 21% men, 13% nonbinary or transgender; 55% aged 18-30 years, 30% 31-40 years, 15% 41-50 years). Of these, 36 people (67%) participated in the subsequent round. Very few had heard the term 'preconception health', understood what it means, or why and for whom it is important. They recommended avoiding unfamiliar terms without further explanation (e.g., preconception health, medical terms), using language that is positive, encouraging and gender-sensitive where possible, and using messages that are specific, nonjudgmental and realistic. The phrases 'health and well-being during the childbearing years', 'health and well-being before pregnancy and parenthood' and 'planning for parenthood' resonated with most public contributors. School-based education, social media campaigns and the National Health Service emerged as priority approaches/settings for raising awareness. CONCLUSION: This public consultation produced recommendations from a diverse group of people of reproductive age in the United Kingdom to improve language and prioritise approaches that increase public understanding of preconception health in ways that are relevant and appropriate to them. This should begin in schools and will require adaptation of curricula, alongside co-development of public awareness campaigns and guidance for healthcare professionals. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This public consultation included a diverse group of members of the public. They were not involved in the original design of the project, but following the initial round of online group discussions, they contributed to the interpretation and refinement of the emerging concepts in a subsequent round of group meetings. After the consultation activity, public contributors formed a Public Advisory Group and have subsequently been involved in other studies on the same topic. Two public contributors (E.R. and F.F.) provided critical input in the preparation and revision of this manuscript and are co-authors of the paper.

The COVID-19 pandemic and food insecurity in households with children: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Food insecurity is defined as not having safe and regular access to nutritious food to meet basic needs. This review aimed to systematically examine the evidence analysing the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on food insecurity and diet quality in households with children <18 years in high-income countries. METHODS: EMBASE, Cochrane Library, International Bibliography of Social Science, and Web of Science; and relevant sites for grey literature were searched on 01/09/2023. Observational studies published from 01/01/2020 until 31/08/2023 in English were included. Systematic reviews and conference abstracts were excluded. Studies with population from countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development were included. Studies were excluded if their population did not include households with children under 18 years. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood institute (NIH) tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies was used for quality assessment. The results are presented as a narrative review. RESULTS: 5,626 records were identified and 19 studies were included. Thirteen were cross-sectional, and six cohorts. Twelve studies were based in the USA, three in Canada, one each in Italy and Australia and two in the UK. Twelve studies reported that the COVID-19 pandemic worsened food insecurity in households with children. One study reported that very low food security had improved likely due to increase in benefits as part of responsive actions to the pandemic by the government. CONCLUSION: Although studies measured food insecurity using different tools, most showed that the pandemic worsened food security in households with children. Lack of diversity in recruited population groups and oversampling of high-risk groups leads to a non-representative sample limiting the generalisability. Food insecure families should be supported, and interventions targeting food insecurity should be developed to improve long-term health.

Educational Gradient of Multi-partner Fertility: First Estimates for the UK.

Recent demographic changes in Western countries have resulted in higher rates of partnership dissolution and serial partnering, and an increase in childbearing across multiple partnerships. This has given rise to more complex family dynamics including multi-partner fertility (MPF), defined as having biological children with two or more partners. Yet estimates of MPF in the UK have not previously been available. This paper describes an 'indirect approach' to estimate the prevalence of MPF in the UK, for men and women, given different assumptions. The paper additionally explores differences in MPF according to own and parental educational attainment. Amongst those born in Britain in 1970, 12-14% of men and 15-18% of women experienced MPF by age 42, depending on the assumptions made. For most of the cohort, MPF occurred with two different coresidential partners. We have established that MPF is a common family formation in the UK, but there are large educational disparities in MPF prevalence.

People from ethnic minorities seeking help for long COVID: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People from ethnic minority groups are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, less likely to access primary health care, and have reported dissatisfaction with health care. Although the prevalence of long COVID in ethnic minority groups is unclear, such populations are underrepresented in long-COVID specialist clinics and long-COVID lived-experience research, which informed the original long-COVID healthcare guidelines. AIM: To understand the lived experiences of long COVID in people from ethnic minority groups. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study of people living with long COVID in the UK. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with people who self-disclosed long COVID were conducted between June 2022 and June 2023 via telephone or video call. Thematic analysis of the data was conducted. People who were living with long COVID, or caring for someone with long COVID, advised on all stages of the research. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 31 participants representing diverse socioeconomic demographics. Help-seeking barriers included little awareness of long COVID or available support, and not feeling worthy of receiving care. Negative healthcare encounters were reported in primary health care; however, these services were crucial for accessing secondary or specialist care. There were further access difficulties and dissatisfaction with specialist care. Experiences of stigma and discrimination contributed to delays in seeking care and unsatisfactory experiences, resulting in feelings of mistrust in health care. CONCLUSION: Empathy, validation of experiences, and fairness in recognition and support of healthcare needs are required to restore trust in health care and improve the experiences of people with long COVID.

What is current care for people with Long COVID in England? A qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate current care for people with Long COVID in England. DESIGN: In-depth, semistructured interviews with people living with Long COVID and Long COVID healthcare professionals; data analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: National Health Service England post-COVID-19 services in six clinics from November 2022 to July 2023. PARTICIPANTS: 15 healthcare professionals and 21 people living with Long COVID currently attending or discharged (18 female; 3 male). RESULTS: Health professionals and people with lived experience highlighted the multifaceted nature of Long COVID, including its varied symptoms, its impact on people's lives and the complexity involved in managing this condition. These impacts encompass physical, social, mental and environmental dimensions. People with Long COVID reported barriers in accessing primary care, as well as negative general practitioner consultations where they felt unheard or invalidated, though some positive interactions were also noted. Peer support or support systems proved highly valuable and beneficial for individuals, aiding their recovery and well-being. Post-COVID-19 services were viewed as spaces where overlooked voices found validation, offering more than medical expertise. Despite initial challenges, healthcare providers' increasing expertise in diagnosing and treating Long COVID has helped refine care approaches for this condition. CONCLUSION: Long COVID care in England is not uniform across all locations. Effective communication, specialised expertise and comprehensive support systems are crucial. A patient-centred approach considering the unique complexities of Long COVID, including physical, mental health, social and environmental aspects is needed. Sustained access to post-COVID-19 services is imperative, with success dependent on offering continuous rehabilitation beyond rapid recovery, acknowledging the condition's enduring impacts and complexities.

Barriers to healthcare access and experiences of stigma: Findings from a coproduced Long Covid case-finding study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Long Covid is often stigmatised, particularly in people who are disadvantaged within society. This may prevent them from seeking help and could lead to widening health inequalities. This coproduced study with a Community Advisory Board (CAB) of people with Long Covid aimed to understand healthcare and wider barriers and stigma experienced by people with probable Long Covid. METHODS: An active case finding approach was employed to find adults with probable, but not yet clinically diagnosed, Long Covid in two localities in London (Camden and Merton) and Derbyshire, England. Interviews explored the barriers to care and the stigma faced by participants and were analysed thematically. This study forms part of the STIMULATE-ICP Collaboration. FINDINGS: Twenty-three interviews were completed. Participants reported limited awareness of what Long Covid is and the available pathways to management. There was considerable self-doubt among participants, sometimes reinforced by interactions with healthcare professionals (HCPs). Participants questioned their deservedness in seeking healthcare support for their symptoms. Hesitancy to engage with healthcare services was motivated by fear of needing more investigation and concerns regarding judgement about the ability to carry out caregiving responsibilities. It was also motivated by the complexity of the clinical presentation and fear of all symptoms being attributed to poor mental health. Participants also reported trying to avoid overburdening the health system. These difficulties were compounded by experiences of stigma and discrimination. The emerging themes reaffirmed a framework of epistemic injustice in relation to Long Covid, where creating, interpreting and conveying knowledge has varied credibility based on the teller's identity characteristics and/or the level of their interpretive resources. CONCLUSION: We have codeveloped recommendations based on the findings. These include early signposting to services, dedicating protected time to listening to people with Long Covid, providing a holistic approach in care pathways, and working to mitigate stigma. Regardless of the diagnosis, people experiencing new symptoms must be encouraged to seek timely medical help. Clear public health messaging is needed among communities already disadvantaged by epistemic injustice to raise awareness of Long Covid, and to share stories that encourage seeking care and to illustrate the adverse effects of stigma. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was coproduced with a CAB made up of 23 members including HCPs, people with lived experience of Long Covid and other stakeholders.

Employment outcomes of people with Long Covid symptoms: community-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the long-term employment consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection is lacking. We used data from a large, community-based sample in the UK to estimate associations between Long Covid and employment outcomes. METHODS: This was an observational, longitudinal study using a pre-post design. We included survey participants from 3 February 2021 to 30 September 2022 when they were aged 16-64 years and not in education. Using conditional logit modelling, we explored the time-varying relationship between Long Covid status ≥12 weeks after a first test-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (reference: pre-infection) and labour market inactivity (neither working nor looking for work) or workplace absence lasting ≥4 weeks. RESULTS: Of 206 299 participants (mean age 45 years, 54% female, 92% white), 15% were ever labour market inactive and 10% were ever long-term absent during follow-up. Compared with pre-infection, inactivity was higher in participants reporting Long Covid 30 to <40 weeks [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.45; 95% CI: 1.17-1.81] or 40 to <52 weeks (aOR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.05-1.72) post-infection. Combining with official statistics on Long Covid prevalence, and assuming a correct statistical model, our estimates translate to 27 000 (95% CI: 6000-47 000) working-age adults in the UK being inactive because of Long Covid in July 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Long Covid is likely to have contributed to reduced participation in the UK labour market, though it is unlikely to be the sole driver. Further research is required to quantify the contribution of other factors, such as indirect health effects of the pandemic.

Food insecurity and diet quality in households accessing food membership clubs in Wessex: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Food membership clubs that charge a small fee for a set number of items are in place in Wessex to address food insecurity (inadequate reliable access to sufficient affordable, nutritious food). These clubs incorporate longer-term solutions such as budgeting support, benefit maximisation, and cooking skills. The Wessex DIET project was established to measure acceptability and impact of these clubs. Given the paucity of evidence on the prevalence of food insecurity in those accessing such clubs, we aimed to quantify food insecurity and assess diet quality and wellbeing at recruitment. METHODS: In this mixed-methods study, we recruited individuals accessing food clubs in Wessex from March 31 to July 31, 2022. Participants provided informed consent and completed a survey (paper or online) at recruitment that collected data on diet and health. We used the modified six-item US Department of Agriculture (USDA) food security survey module. Follow-up surveys were administered after use of clubs (planned for 3, 6, and 12 months). Participants were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview. We used data from the baseline survey to quantify food insecurity and assess diet quality and wellbeing at point of first access to food clubs. FINDINGS: Of 97 participants recruited, five (5%) were aged 18-24 years, 15 (15%) 25-34 years, 48 (49%) 35-54 years, 13 (13%) 55-64 years, and nine (9%) 65 years and older (seven [7%] did not report their age). 69 (71%) participants were female and 23 (24%) were male (five [5%] did not respond to this question), 79 (81%) were White, and 65 (67%) reported having at least one dependent child. 55 (57%) reported skipping or cutting size of meals because there was not enough money for food. Food security status was calculated in 74 participants who answered all six questions of the USDA module, with 30 (41%) reporting low food security and 32 (43%) reporting very low food security. 31 (32%) of 97 participants reported rarely or never eating fruit, with 23 (24%) eating fruit at least once a day. The most common reported frequency of vegetable consumption was 2-3 times a week (26, 27%) and 4-6 times a week (23, 24%). 12 participants agreed to an interview. The clubs were well received, with participants noticing an improvement in their diet and finances. INTERPRETATION: This study highlights the high prevalence of food insecurity in those accessing food clubs in Wessex, which is expected in a population using food aid, and positive reflections from participants regarding their diet quality after using this service. Findings might not be generalisable nationally. Follow-up will assess impact of the clubs on food insecurity, diet quality and wellbeing, contributing to the evidence base of the effectiveness of food clubs to address these outcomes. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration Wessex.

Impact of long COVID-19 on work: a co-produced survey.

BACKGROUND: A proportion of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop post-COVID-19 condition (also known as long COVID), a predominantly multisystem condition resulting in varying degrees of functional disability limiting day-to-day activities. We aimed to describe the impact of long COVID on work. METHODS: We co-produced baseline and follow-up online surveys with people with lived experience of long COVID (including three of the co-authors). Respondents were aged 18 years and older with self-reported long COVID following confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection who were not hospitalised in the first 2 weeks of illness. The baseline survey was administered in November, 2020, using convenience non-probability sampling through social media. Following informed consent, participants completed a follow-up survey at 1 year (November, 2021). Ethics approval was granted by the University of Southampton. FINDINGS: Of 2210 invited, 1153 (52%) participants responded to the survey (mean age of 47·7 years [SD 10·6], 965 [84%] female, 1096 [95%] White, and 892 [78%] holding a university degree). 54 participants (4·7%) reported recovery at follow-up. Median duration of illness was 19·8 months (IQR 19·3-20·1) at follow-up. An equal proportion reported being unable to work at baseline (20·4%, n=235) and follow-up (20·6%, n=237). However, a higher proportion reported being made redundant or taking early retirement at follow-up (8·9%, n=102) than at baseline (2·2%, n=25). 209 (18·1%) reported losing or resigning or leaving their job due to long COVID at follow-up compared with 170 (14·8%) participants at baseline. 307 (26·6%) participants reported not taking time off-sick due to long COVID at baseline, decreasing to 122 (10·6%) at follow-up. Of the 656 individuals reporting length of time off-sick, 354 (54%) were off-sick for more than 3 months, with 113 (17·2%) off-sick for more than 12 months. Nearly half (47%, n=538) reported a loss in income. INTERPRETATION: The convenience non-probability sampling limits generalisability. Research is needed in a representative population sample to characterise the effect on working patterns in people with long COVID, particularly in those with less flexible and more physically demanding occupations who may be less able to take time off to recover. FUNDING: None.

Risk of New-Onset Long COVID Following Reinfection With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: A Community-Based Cohort Study.

Background: Little is known about the risk of long COVID following reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We estimated the likelihood of new-onset, self-reported long COVID after a second SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to a first infection. Methods: We included UK COVID-19 Infection Survey participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 November 2021 and 8 October 2022. The primary outcome was self-reported long COVID 12-20 weeks after each infection. Separate analyses were performed for those <16 years and ≥16 years. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for new-onset long COVID using logistic regression, comparing second to first infections, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics and calendar date of infection, plus vaccination status in participants ≥16 years of age. Results: Overall, long COVID was reported by those ≥16 years after 4.0% and 2.4% of first and second infections, respectively; the corresponding estimates among those aged <16 years were 1.0% and 0.6%. The aOR for long COVID after second compared to first infections was 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI], .63-.81) for those ≥16 years and 0.93 (95% CI, .57-1.53) for those <16 years. Conclusions: The risk of new-onset long COVID after a second SARS-CoV-2 infection is lower than that after a first infection for persons aged ≥16 years, though there is no evidence of a difference in risk for those <16 years. However, there remains some risk of new-onset long COVID after a second infection, with around 1 in 40 of those aged ≥16 years and 1 in 165 of those <16 years reporting long COVID after a second infection.

A conceptual framework for characterising lifecourse determinants of multiple long-term condition multimorbidity.

Objective: Social, biological and environmental factors in early-life, defined as the period from preconception until age 18, play a role in shaping the risk of multiple long-term condition multimorbidity. However, there is a need to conceptualise these early-life factors, how they relate to each other, and provide conceptual framing for future research on aetiology and modelling prevention scenarios of multimorbidity. We develop a conceptual framework to characterise the population-level domains of early-life determinants of future multimorbidity. Method: This work was conducted as part of the Multidisciplinary Ecosystem to study Lifecourse Determinants and Prevention of Early-onset Burdensome Multimorbidity (MELD-B) study. The conceptualisation of multimorbidity lifecourse determinant domains was shaped by a review of existing research evidence and policy, and co-produced with public involvement via two workshops. Results: Early-life risk factors incorporate personal, social, economic, behavioural and environmental factors, and the key domains discussed in research evidence, policy, and with public contributors included adverse childhood experiences, socioeconomics, the social and physical environment, and education. Policy recommendations more often focused on individual-level factors as opposed to the wider determinants of health discussed within the research evidence. Some domains highlighted through our co-production process with public contributors, such as religion and spirituality, health screening and check-ups, and diet, were not adequately considered within the research evidence or policy. Conclusions: This co-produced conceptualisation can inform research directions using primary and secondary data to investigate the early-life characteristics of population groups at risk of future multimorbidity, as well as policy directions to target public health prevention scenarios of early-onset multimorbidity.

Mixed methods feasibility and usability testing of a childhood obesity risk estimation tool.

BACKGROUND: A Childhood Obesity Risk Estimation tool (SLOPE CORE) has been developed based on prediction models using routinely available maternity and early childhood data to estimate risk of childhood obesity at 4-5 years. This study aims to test the feasibility, acceptability and usability of SLOPE CORE within an enhanced health visiting (EHV) service in the UK, as one context in which this tool could be utilised. METHODS: A mixed methods approach was used to assess feasibility of implementing SLOPE CORE. Health Visitors (HVs) were trained to use the tool, and in the processes for recruiting parents into the study. HVs were recruited using purposive sampling and parents by convenience sampling. HVs and parents were invited to take part in interviews or focus groups to explore their experiences of the tool. HVs were asked to complete a system usability scale (SUS) questionnaire. RESULTS: Five HVs and seven parents took part in the study. HVs found SLOPE CORE easy to use with a mean SUS of 84.4, (n = 4, range 70-97.5) indicating excellent usability. Five HVs and three parents took part in qualitative work. The tool was acceptable and useful for both parents and HVs. Parents expressed a desire to know their child's risk of future obesity, provided this was accompanied by additional information, or support to modify risk. HVs appreciated the health promotion opportunity that the tool presented and felt that it facilitated difficult conversations around weight, by providing 'clinical evidence' for risk, and placing the focus of the conversation onto the tool result, rather than their professional judgement. The main potential barriers to use of the tool included the need for internet access, and concerns around time needed to have a sensitive discussion around a conceptually difficult topic (risk). CONCLUSIONS: SLOPE CORE could potentially be useful in clinical practice. It may support targeting limited resources towards families most at risk of childhood obesity. Further research is needed to explore how the tool might be efficiently incorporated into practice, and to evaluate the impact of the tool, and any subsequent interventions, on preventing childhood obesity.

Prediction of childhood overweight and obesity at age 10-11: findings from the Studying Lifecourse Obesity PrEdictors and the Born in Bradford cohorts.

BACKGROUND: In England, 41% of children aged 10-11 years live with overweight or obesity. Identifying children at risk of developing overweight or obesity may help target early prevention interventions. We aimed to develop and externally validate prediction models of childhood overweight and obesity at age 10-11 years using routinely collected weight and height measurements at age 4-5 years and maternal and early-life health data. METHODS: We used an anonymised linked cohort of maternal pregnancy and birth health records in Hampshire, UK between 2003 and 2008 and child health records. Childhood body mass index (BMI), adjusted for age and sex, at 10-11 years was used to define the outcome of overweight and obesity (BMI ≥ 91st centile) in the models. Logistic regression models and multivariable fractional polynomials were used to select model predictors and to identify transformations of continuous predictors that best predict the outcome. Models were externally validated using data from the Born in Bradford birth cohort. Model performance was assessed using discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: Childhood BMI was available for 6566 children at 4-5 (14.6% overweight) and 10-11 years (26.1% overweight) with 10.8% overweight at both timepoints. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.82 at development and 0.83 on external validation for the model only incorporating two predictors: BMI at 4-5 years and child sex. AUC increased to 0.84 on development and 0.85 on external validation on additionally incorporating maternal predictors in early pregnancy (BMI, smoking, age, educational attainment, ethnicity, parity, employment status). Models were well calibrated. CONCLUSIONS: This prediction modelling can be applied at 4-5 years to identify the risk for childhood overweight at 10-11 years, with slightly improved prediction with the inclusion of maternal data. These prediction models demonstrate that routinely collected data can be used to target early preventive interventions to reduce the prevalence of childhood obesity.

Long Covid active case finding study protocol: A co-produced community-based pilot within the STIMULATE-ICP study (Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long-COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways).

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Long Covid is a significant public health concern with potentially negative implications for health inequalities. We know that those who are already socially disadvantaged in society are more exposed to COVID-19, experience the worst health outcomes and are more likely to suffer economically. We also know that these groups are more likely to experience stigma and have negative healthcare experiences even before the pandemic. However, little is known about disadvantaged groups' experiences of Long Covid, and preliminary evidence suggests they may be under-represented in those who access formal care. We will conduct a pilot study in a defined geographical area in London, United Kingdom to test the feasibility of a community-based approach of identifying Long Covid cases that have not been clinically diagnosed and have not been referred to Long Covid specialist services. We will explore the barriers to accessing recognition, care, and support, as well as experiences of stigma and perceived discrimination. METHODS: This protocol and study materials were co-produced with a Community Advisory Board (CAB) made up primarily of people living with Long Covid. Working with voluntary organisations, a study leaflet will be distributed in the local community to highlight Long Covid symptoms and invite those experiencing them to participate in the study if they are not formally diagnosed. Potential participants will be assessed according to the study's inclusion criteria and offered the opportunity to participate if they fit them. Awareness of Long Covid and associated symptoms, experiences of trying to access care, as well as stigma and discrimination will be explored through qualitative interviews with participants. Upon completion of the interviews, participants will be offered a referral to the local social prescribing team to receive support that is personalised to them potentially including, but not restricted to, liaising with their primary care provider and the regional Long Covid clinic.

Systematic Review of the Prevalence of Long COVID.

Background: Long COVID occurs in those infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) whose symptoms persist or develop beyond the acute phase. We conducted a systematic review to determine the prevalence of persistent symptoms, functional disability, or pathological changes in adults or children at least 12 weeks postinfection. Methods: We searched key registers and databases from January 1, 2020 to November 2, 2021, limited to publications in English and studies with at least 100 participants. Studies in which all participants were critically ill were excluded. Long COVID was extracted as prevalence of at least 1 symptom or pathology, or prevalence of the most common symptom or pathology, at 12 weeks or later. Heterogeneity was quantified in absolute terms and as a proportion of total variation and explored across predefined subgroups (PROSPERO ID CRD42020218351). Results: One hundred twenty studies in 130 publications were included. Length of follow-up varied between 12 weeks and 12 months. Few studies had low risk of bias. All complete and subgroup analyses except 1 had I2 ≥90%, with prevalence of persistent symptoms range of 0%-93% (pooled estimate [PE], 42.1%; 95% prediction interval [PI], 6.8% to 87.9%). Studies using routine healthcare records tended to report lower prevalence (PE, 13.6%; PI, 1.2% to 68%) of persistent symptoms/pathology than self-report (PE, 43.9%; PI, 8.2% to 87.2%). However, studies systematically investigating pathology in all participants at follow up tended to report the highest estimates of all 3 (PE, 51.7%; PI, 12.3% to 89.1%). Studies of hospitalized cases had generally higher estimates than community-based studies. Conclusions: The way in which Long COVID is defined and measured affects prevalence estimation. Given the widespread nature of SARS-CoV-2 infection globally, the burden of chronic illness is likely to be substantial even using the most conservative estimates.