Should I Take Aspirin? (SITA): RCT of a decision aid for cancer chemoprevention.

Background Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50-70 years old consider taking low-dose aspirin to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Aim To determine the effect of a consultation with a researcher in general practice using a decision aid about taking low-dose aspirin to prevent CRC on informed decision-making and low-dose aspirin uptake compared to a general CRC prevention brochure. Design and Setting Individually randomised controlled trial in six general practices in Victoria, Australia, from October 2020 to March 2021. Method Patients aged 50-70 years attending a general practitioner (GP) were recruited consecutively. The intervention was a consultation using a decision aid to discuss taking aspirin to reduce CRC risk; control consultations discussed reducing CRC risk generally. The self-reported co-primary outcomes were informed choices about taking aspirin at one month and low-dose aspirin uptake at six months. Results 261 participants (86% of eligible patients) were randomised into trial arms (129 intervention, 132 control). 17.7% (20/113) of intervention and 7.6% (9/118) control participants reported making an informed choice at one month, an estimated 9.1% (95% CI 0.29% to 18.5) between-arm difference in proportions [odds ratio (OR) 2.47 (97.5% CI:0.94 to 6.52) p=0.074]. The proportions of individuals who reported using aspirin at six months were: 10.2% (12/118) intervention vs 13.8% (16/116) control (estimated between-arm difference: -4.0% (95% CI: -13.5 to 5.5); [OR= 0.68 (97.5% CI:0.27 to 1.70), p= 0.692]. Conclusion The decision aid improved informed decision-making; but has little effect on long-term regular use of aspirin to reduce CRC risk.

Increasing bowel cancer screening using SMS in general practice: the SMARTscreen cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Australia has one of the highest incidences of colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide. The Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is a best-practice, organised screening programme, but uptake is low (40.9%) and increasing participation could reduce morbidity and mortality associated with CRC. Endorsement by GPs is strongly associated with increasing screening uptake. AIM: This study (SMARTscreen) aimed to test whether a multi-intervention short message service (SMS) sent by general practices to 50-60-year-old patients who were due to receive the NBCSP kit would increase NBCSP uptake, by comparing it with usual care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A stratified cluster randomised controlled trial was undertaken, involving 21 Australian general practices in Western Victoria, Australia. METHOD: For intervention practices, people due to receive the NBCSP kit within a 6-month study period were sent an SMS just before receiving the kit. The SMS included a personalised message from the person's general practice endorsing the kit, a motivational narrative video, an instructional video, and a link to more information. Control practices continued with usual care, comprising at-home testing with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) through the NBCSP. The primary outcome was the between-arm percentage difference in uptake of FIT screening within 12 months from randomisation, which was estimated using generalised linear model regression. RESULTS: In total, 39.2% (1143/2914) of people in 11 intervention practices and 23.0% (583/2537) of people in 10 control practices had a FIT result in their electronic health records - a difference of 16.5% (95% confidence interval = 2.02 to 30.9). CONCLUSION: The SMS intervention increased NBCSP kit return in 50-60-year-old patients in general practice. This finding informed a larger trial - SMARTERscreen - to test this intervention in a broader Australian population.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a healthy relationship tool for men who use intimate partner violence (BETTER MAN).

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is common globally, but there is a lack of research on how to intervene early with men who might be using IPV. Building on evidence supporting the benefits of online interventions for women victim/survivors, this study aims to test whether a healthy relationship website (BETTER MAN) is effective at improving men's help seeking, their recognition of behaviours as IPV and their readiness to change their behaviours. METHODS/DESIGN: In this two-group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial, men aged 18-50 years residing in Australia who have been in an adult intimate relationship (female, male or non-binary partner) in the past 12 months are eligible. Men who report being worried about their behaviour or have had others express concerns about their behaviour towards a partner in the past 12 months will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive the BETTER MAN website or a comparator website (basic healthy relationships information). The BETTER MAN intervention includes self-directed, interactive reflection activities spread across three modules: Better Relationships, Better Values and Better Communication, with a final "action plan" of strategies and resources. Using an intention to treat approach, the primary analysis will estimate between-group difference in the proportion of men who report undertaking help-seeking behaviours for relationship issues in the last 6 months, at 6 months post-baseline. Analysis of secondary outcomes will estimate between-group differences in: (i) mean score of awareness of behaviours in relationships as abusive immediately post-use of website; (ii) mean score on readiness to change immediately post-use of website and 3 months after baseline; and (iii) cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effectiveness of an online healthy relationship tool for men who may use IPV. BETTER MAN could be incorporated into practice in community and health settings, providing an evidence-informed website to assist men to seek help to promote healthy relationships and reduce use of IPV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000786796 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: 2 June 2022. Version: 1 (28 September 2023).

SMARTERscreen protocol: a three-arm cluster randomised controlled trial of patient SMS messaging in general practice to increase participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Australia persistently has one of the highest rates of colorectal cancer (CRC) in the world. Australia's National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) sends a biennial Faecal Immunochemical Test (FIT)-the 'NBCSP kit'-to everyone eligible for the programme between 50 and 74 years old; however, participation in the programme is low, especially in the 50- to 60-year-old age group. Our previous efficacy trial ('SMARTscreen') demonstrated an absolute increase in uptake of 16.5% (95% confidence interval = 2.02-30.9%) for people sent an SMS with motivational and instructional videos, from their general practice prior to receiving their NBCSP kit, compared to those receiving usual care. Building on the strengths of the SMARTscreen trial and addressing limitations, the 'SMARTERscreen' trial will test the effect on participation in the NBCSP of sending either an SMS only or an SMS with online video material to general practice patients due to receive their NBCSP compared to 'usual care'. METHODS: SMARTERscreen is a three-arm stratified cluster randomised controlled trial involving 63 general practices in two states in Australia. Eligible patients are patients who are aged 49-60 years and due to receive their NBCSP kit within the next 2 weeks during the intervention period. General practices will be equally randomised to three trial arms (21:21:21, estimated average 260 patients/practice). The two interventions include (i) an SMS with an encouraging message from their general practice or (ii) the same SMS with weblinks to additional motivational and instructional videos. The control arm will receive 'usual care'. Using the intention-to-treat approach, primary analysis will estimate the three pair-wise between-arm differences in the proportion of eligible patients who participate in the NBCSP within 6 months of when their kit is sent, utilising screening data from the Australian National Cancer Screening Register (NCSR). Patient intervention adherence to the interventions will also be evaluated. Findings will be incorporated into the Policy1-Bowel microsimulation model to estimate the long-term health benefits and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. DISCUSSION: SMARTERscreen will provide high-level evidence determining whether an SMS or an SMS with web-based material sent to general practice patients prior to receiving their NBCSP kit increases participation in bowel cancer screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12623000036617. Registered on 13 January 2023. Trial URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=385119&isClinicalTrial=False.

Will a fee-for-service payment for a young people's health assessment in general practice increase the detection of health risk behaviours and health conditions? Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial (RAd Health Trial).

INTRODUCTION: Adolescence is a period of major transition in physical, cognitive, social and emotional development, and the peak time for the onset of mental health conditions, substance use disorders and sexual and reproductive health risks. Prevention and treatment during this time can improve health and well-being now and into the future. However, despite clinical guidelines recommending annual preventive health assessments for young people, health professionals cite lack of consultation time and adequate funding as key barriers. This trial aims to determine whether a specific fee-for-service ('rebate payment') for a young person's health assessment, is effective and cost-effective at increasing the detection and management of health risk behaviours and conditions among young people. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted in Australian general practice. 42 general practices (clusters) will be randomly allocated 1:1 to either an intervention arm where general practitioners receive a rebate payment for each annual health assessment undertaken for 14-24-year-olds during a 2 year study period, or a control arm (no rebate). The rebate amount will be based on the Medical Benefits Schedule (Australia's list of health professional services subsidised by the Australian Government) currently available for similar age-based assessments. Our primary outcome will be the annual rate of risk behaviours and health conditions recorded in the patient electronic health record (eg, alcohol/drug use, sexual activity and mental health issues). Secondary outcomes include the annual rate of patient management activities related to health risks and conditions identified (eg, contraception prescribed, sexually transmitted infection tests ordered). A process evaluation will assess acceptability, adoption, fidelity and sustainability of the rebate; an economic evaluation will assess its cost-effectiveness. Analyses will be intention-to-treat. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from University of Melbourne Human and Research Ethics Committee (2022-23435-29990-3). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12622000114741.

The PRESIDE (PhaRmacogEnomicS In DEpression) Trial: a double-blind randomised controlled trial of pharmacogenomic-informed prescribing of antidepressants on depression outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The evidence for the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing is growing, and guidelines exist for the use of PGx testing to inform prescribing of 13 antidepressants. Although previous randomised controlled trials of PGx testing for antidepressant prescribing have shown an association with remission of depression in clinical psychiatric settings, few trials have focused on the primary care setting, where most antidepressant prescribing occurs. METHODS: The PRESIDE Trial is a stratified double-blinded randomised controlled superiority trial that aims to evaluate the impact of a PGx-informed antidepressant prescribing report (compared with standard prescribing using the Australian Therapeutic Guidelines) on depressive symptoms after 12 weeks, when delivered in primary care. Six hundred seventy-two patients aged 18-65 years of general practitioners (GPs) in Victoria with moderate to severe depressive symptoms, measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), will be randomly allocated 1:1 to each arm using a computer-generated sequence. Participants and GPs will be blinded to the study arm. The primary outcome is a difference between arms in the change of depressive symptoms, measured using the PHQ-9 after 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes include a difference between the arms in change in PHQ-9 score at 4, 8 and 26 weeks, proportion in remission at 12 weeks, a change in side effect profile of antidepressant medications, adherence to antidepressant medications, change in quality of life and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence as to whether PGx-informed antidepressant prescribing is clinically efficacious and cost-effective. It will inform national and international policy and guidelines about the use of PGx to select antidepressants for people with moderate to severe depressive symptoms presenting in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12621000181808. Registered on 22 February 2021.

The Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction (CRISP) trial: a randomised controlled trial of a decision support tool for risk-stratified colorectal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: A risk-stratified approach to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening could result in a more acceptable balance of benefits and harms, and be more cost-effective. AIM: To determine the effect of a consultation in general practice using a computerised risk assessment and decision support tool (Colorectal cancer RISk Prediction, CRISP) on risk-appropriate CRC screening. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomised controlled trial in 10 general practices in Melbourne, Australia, from May 2017 to May 2018. METHOD: Participants were recruited from a consecutive sample of patients aged 50-74 years attending their GP. Intervention consultations included CRC risk assessment using the CRISP tool and discussion of CRC screening recommendations. Control group consultations focused on lifestyle CRC risk factors. The primary outcome was risk-appropriate CRC screening at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 734 participants (65.1% of eligible patients) were randomised (369 intervention, 365 control); the primary outcome was determined for 722 (362 intervention, 360 control). There was a 6.5% absolute increase (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.28 to 13.2) in risk-appropriate screening in the intervention compared with the control group (71.5% versus 65.0%; odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.86, P = 0.057). In those due CRC screening during follow-up, there was a 20.3% (95% CI = 10.3 to 30.4) increase (intervention 59.8% versus control 38.9%; OR 2.31, 95% CI = 1.51 to 3.53, P<0.001) principally by increasing faecal occult blood testing in those at average risk. CONCLUSION: A risk assessment and decision support tool increases risk-appropriate CRC screening in those due screening. The CRISP intervention could commence in people in their fifth decade to ensure people start CRC screening at the optimal age with the most cost-effective test.

Changes in mental health across the COVID-19 pandemic for local and international university students in Australia: a cohort study.

PURPOSE: Previous research has indicated that university students experienced substantial mental health issues during the global COVID-19 pandemic, but few studies have considered changes relative to pre-pandemic levels across population groups. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare changes in mental health and associated stressors across the pandemic for international and local university students studying in Australia. METHODS: In a cohort of 4407 university students, we assessed depression (Patient Health Questionnaire 2), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2), social support (Medical Outcomes Study-Social Support Survey), inability to afford food, fear of partner, and experiences of discrimination, both pre-pandemic (April-May 2019) and during the pandemic (September-October 2020). Change in prevalence between local and international students were estimated with logistic regression, adjusting for baseline factors. RESULTS: Compared to local students, international students experienced an increase in probable major depression (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.23, 1.66), low social support (OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.23, 3.11), inability to afford food (OR 5.21, 95% CI 3.97, 6.83) race-based discrimination (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.82, 2.68) and fear of partner (OR 3.46, 95% CI 2.26, 5.13). Interaction analyses indicated that these issues were more likely to be experienced by students living outside their country of origin, inclusive of international students based in Australia (depression p value interaction term 0.02). CONCLUSION: The pandemic had a substantial negative impact on international students, particularly those living outside of their country of origin during the pandemic. The inequalities exacerbated by the pandemic were present prior to the pandemic and are likely to continue post-pandemic without action. Interventions to build the supports for international students need to be urgently explored.

Towards a health promoting university: descriptive findings on health, wellbeing and academic performance amongst university students in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Universities are increasingly recognised as institutions where health and wellbeing can be promoted to maximise academic outcomes, career transitions, and lifelong positive health behaviours. There is concern about the mental health of university students and other factors which affect academic outcomes particularly for subgroups such as international students. There are few cohort studies of the breadth of issues that can impact on mental health and academic outcomes for both local and international students. We conducted a baseline prevalence survey of students at a large Australian university covering health, academic, and social determinants of wellbeing. The purpose was to inform the university's new student health and wellbeing framework with a view to follow-up to determine predictors of mental ill-health and academic outcomes in the subsequent year. In this paper we present the baseline prevalence data and report on selected mental health and health care access issues for local and international students. METHODS: The entire university population as of April 2019 of over 56,375 students aged 18 or above were invited to complete the online survey. Questions explored eight domains: demographic characteristics, general health and wellbeing, mental health, risk taking behaviours, psychosocial stressors, learning and academic factors, social and cultural environment, and awareness of and access to health and wellbeing services. Records of academic results were also accessed and matched with survey data for a large subset of students providing consent. RESULTS: Fourteen thousand eight hundred eighty (26.4%) students commenced our survey and were representative of the entire student population on demographic characteristics. Three quarters were aged between 18 to 25 years and one third were international students. Eighty-five percent consented to access of their academic records. Similar proportions of local and international students experienced symptoms of a depression or anxiety disorder, however international students were less aware of and less likely to access available health services both inside and external to the university. We also reported on the prevalence of: general lifestyle factors (diet, exercise, amount of daily sleep); risk-taking behaviours (including alcohol, tobacco and other drug use; unprotected sexual activity); psychosocial stressors (financial, intimate partner violence, discrimination, academic stressors, acculturative stress); subjects failed; resilience; social supports; social media use; and health services accessed online. CONCLUSIONS: This rigorous and comprehensive examination of the health status of local and international students in an Australian university student population establishes the prevalence of mental health issues and other psychosocial determinants of health and wellbeing, along with academic performance. This study will inform a university-wide student wellbeing framework to guide health and wellbeing promotion and is a baseline for a 12-month follow-up of the cohort in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Developing and internally validating a prediction model for total knee replacement surgery in patients with osteoarthritis.

Objective: The objective of this study was to develop and internally validate a clinical algorithm for use in general practice that predicts the probability of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery within the next five years for patients with osteoarthritis. The purpose of the model is to encourage early uptake of first-line treatment strategies in patients likely to undergo TKR and to provide a cohort for the development and testing of novel interventions that prevent or delay the progression to TKR. Method: Electronic health records (EHRs) from 201,462 patients with osteoarthritis aged 45 years and over from 483 general practices across Australia were linked with records from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry and the National Death Index. A Fine and Gray competing risk prediction model was developed using these data to predict the risk of TKR within the next five years. Results: During a follow-up time of 5 years, 15,979 (7.9%) patients underwent TKR and 13,873 (6.9%) died. Predictors included in the final algorithm were age, previous knee replacement, knee surgery (other than TKR), prescribing of osteoarthritis medication in the 12 months prior, comorbidity count and diagnosis of a mental health condition. Optimism corrected model discrimination was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.66 to 0.67) and model calibration acceptable. Conclusion: The model has the potential to reduce some of the economic burden associated with TKR in Australia. External validation and further optimisation of the algorithm will be carried out prior to implementation within Australian general practice EHR systems.

Economic evaluation of a Decision Support Tool to guide intensity of mental health care in general practice: the Link-me pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This paper reports on the cost-effectiveness evaluation of Link-me - a digitally supported, systematic approach to triaging care for depression and anxiety in primary care that uses a patient-completed Decision Support Tool (DST). METHODS: The economic evaluation was conducted alongside a parallel, stratified individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing prognosis-matched care to usual care at six- and 12-month follow-up. Twenty-three general practices in three Australian Primary Health Networks recruited 1,671 adults (aged 18 - 75 years), predicted by the DST to have minimal/mild or severe depressive or anxiety symptoms in three months. The minimal/mild prognostic group was referred to low intensity services. Participants screened in the severe prognostic group were offered high intensity care navigation, a model of care coordination. The outcome measures included in this evaluation were health sector costs (including development and delivery of the DST, care navigation and other healthcare services used) and societal costs (health sector costs plus lost productivity), psychological distress [Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10)] and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from the EuroQol 5-dimension quality of life questionnaire with Australian general population preference weights applied. Costs were valued in 2018-19 Australian dollars (A$). RESULTS: Across all participants, the health sector incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Link-me per point decrease in K10 at six months was estimated at $1,082 (95% CI $391 to $6,204) increasing to $2,371 (95% CI $191 to Dominated) at 12 months. From a societal perspective, the ICER was estimated at $1,257/K10 point decrease (95% CI Dominant to Dominated) at six months, decreasing to $1,217 (95% CI Dominant to Dominated) at 12 months. No significant differences in QALYs were detected between trial arms and the intervention was dominated (less effective, more costly) based on the cost/QALY ICER. CONCLUSIONS: The Link-me approach to stepped mental health care would not be considered cost-effective utilising a cost/QALY outcome metric commonly adopted by health technology assessment agencies. Rather, Link-me showed a trend toward cost-effectiveness by providing improvement in mental health symptoms, measured by the K10, at an additional cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ANZCTRN 12617001333303.

The SCRIPT trial: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a polygenic risk score to tailor colorectal cancer screening in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can predict the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and target screening more precisely than current guidelines using age and family history alone. Primary care, as a far-reaching point of healthcare and routine provider of cancer screening and risk information, may be an ideal location for their widespread implementation. METHODS: This trial aims to determine whether the SCRIPT intervention results in more risk-appropriate CRC screening after 12 months in individuals attending general practice, compared with standard cancer risk reduction information. The SCRIPT intervention consists of a CRC PRS, tailored risk-specific screening recommendations and a risk report for participants and their GP, delivered in general practice. Patients aged between 45 and 70 inclusive, attending their GP, will be approached for participation. For those over 50, only those overdue for CRC screening will be eligible to participate. Two hundred and seventy-four participants will be randomised to the intervention or control arms, stratified by general practice, using a computer-generated allocation sequence. The primary outcome is risk-appropriate CRC screening after 12 months. For those in the intervention arm, risk-appropriate screening is defined using PRS-derived risk; for those in the control arm, it is defined using family history and national screening guidelines. Timing, type and results of the previous screening are considered in both arms. Objective health service data will capture screening behaviour. Secondary outcomes include cancer-specific worry, risk perception, predictors of CRC screening behaviour, screening intentions and health service use at 1, 6 and 12 months post-intervention delivery. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to determine whether a PRS-derived personalised CRC risk estimate delivered in primary care increases risk-appropriate CRC screening. A future population risk-stratified CRC screening programme could incorporate risk assessment within primary care while encouraging adherence to targeted screening recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12621000092897p. Registered on 1 February 2021.

Economic evaluation of the Target-D platform to match depression management to severity prognosis in primary care: A within-trial cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Target-D, a new person-centred e-health platform matching depression care to symptom severity prognosis (minimal/mild, moderate or severe) has demonstrated greater improvement in depressive symptoms than usual care plus attention control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Target-D compared to usual care from a health sector and partial societal perspective across 3-month and 12-month follow-up. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside the Target-D randomised controlled trial; which involved 1,868 participants attending 14 general practices in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Data on costs were collected using a resource use questionnaire administered concurrently with all other outcome measures at baseline, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Intervention costs were assessed using financial records compiled during the trial. All costs were expressed in Australian dollars (A$) for the 2018-19 financial year. QALY outcomes were derived using the Assessment of Quality of Life-8D (AQoL-8D) questionnaire. On a per person basis, the Target-D intervention cost between $14 (minimal/mild prognostic group) and $676 (severe group). Health sector and societal costs were not significantly different between trial arms at both 3 and 12 months. Relative to a A$50,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, the probability of Target-D being cost-effective under a health sector perspective was 81% at 3 months and 96% at 12 months. From a societal perspective, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 30% at 3 months and 80% at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Target-D is likely to represent good value for money for health care decision makers. Further evaluation of QALY outcomes should accompany any routine roll-out to assess comparability of results to those observed in the trial. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000537459).

Protocol for a cluster randomized control trial of the impact of the Breaking the Man Code workshops on adolescent boys' intentions to seek help.

BACKGROUND: Males in Australia and many other countries account for three-quarters of all deaths by suicide. School-based programs to support young men's wellbeing have become increasingly common in recent years and show much promise to tackle the issue of male suicide by fostering protective factors and mitigating harmful factors. However, only a few of these programs have been evaluated. This trial seeks to address the lack of knowledge about the potential for school-based gender-transformative programs to have a positive impact on boys. Breaking the Man Code workshops, delivered by Tomorrow Man in Australia, challenge and transform harmful masculinities with young men with a view to ultimately reducing their suicide risk. The trial aims to examine whether adolescent boys who participate in the Breaking the Man Code workshop demonstrate an increase in their likelihood of seeking help for personal or emotional problems compared to boys waiting to take part in the workshop. METHODS: A stratified cluster randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups will be conducted. Schools will be randomly allocated 1:1, stratified by location of the schools (rural or urban), state (Victoria, NSW, or WA), and mode of workshop delivery (face-to-face or online), to the intervention group and waitlist control group. DISCUSSION: The Breaking the Man Code workshops show great promise as a school-based prevention intervention. The trial will fill a gap in knowledge that is critically needed to inform future interventions with boys and men. Some methodological challenges have been identified related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, such as delays in ethics approvals and the need for Tomorrow Man to introduce an online delivery option for the workshop. The trial protocol has been designed to mitigate these challenges. The findings from the trial will be used to improve the workshops and will assist others who are designing and implementing suicide prevention interventions for boys and men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12620001134910 ). Registered on 30 October 2020.

The SMARTscreen Trial: a randomised controlled trial investigating the efficacy of a GP-endorsed narrative SMS to increase participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program.

BACKGROUND: Increasing participation in the Australian National Bowel Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) is the most efficient and cost-effective way of reducing mortality associated with colorectal cancer by detecting and treating early-stage disease. Currently, only 44% of Australians aged 50-74 years complete the NBCSP. This efficacy trial aims to test whether this SMS intervention is an effective method for increasing participation in the NBCSP. Furthermore, a process evaluation will explore the barriers and facilitators to sending the SMS from general practice. METHODS: We will recruit 20 general practices in the western region of Victoria, Australia to participate in a cluster randomised controlled trial. General practices will be randomly allocated with a 1:1 ratio to either a control or intervention group. Established general practice software will be used to identify patients aged 50 to 60 years old who are due to receive a NBCSP kit in the next month. The SMS intervention includes GP endorsement and links to narrative messages about the benefits of and instructions on how to complete the NBCSP kit. It will be sent from intervention general practices to eligible patients prior to receiving the NBCSP kit. We require 1400 eligible patients to provide 80% power with a two-sided 5% significance level to detect a 10% increase in CRC screening participation in the intervention group compared to the control group. Our primary outcome is the difference in the proportion of eligible patients who completed a faecal occult blood test (FOBT) between the intervention and control group for up to 12 months after the SMS was sent, as recorded in their electronic medical record (EMR). A process evaluation using interview data collected from general practice staff (GP, practice managers, nurses) and patients will explore the feasibility and acceptability of sending and receiving a SMS to prompt completing a NBCSP kit. DISCUSSION: This efficacy trial will provide initial trial evidence of the utility of an SMS narrative intervention to increase participation in the NBCSP. The results will inform decisions about the need for and design of a larger, multi-state trial of this SMS intervention to determine its cost-effectiveness and future implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620001020976 . Registered on 17 October 2020.

Assessing the suitability of general practice electronic health records for clinical prediction model development: a data quality assessment.

BACKGROUND: The use of general practice electronic health records (EHRs) for research purposes is in its infancy in Australia. Given these data were collected for clinical purposes, questions remain around data quality and whether these data are suitable for use in prediction model development. In this study we assess the quality of data recorded in 201,462 patient EHRs from 483 Australian general practices to determine its usefulness in the development of a clinical prediction model for total knee replacement (TKR) surgery in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Variables to be used in model development were assessed for completeness and plausibility. Accuracy for the outcome and competing risk were assessed through record level linkage with two gold standard national registries, Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) and National Death Index (NDI). The validity of the EHR data was tested using participant characteristics from the 2014-15 Australian National Health Survey (NHS). RESULTS: There were substantial missing data for body mass index and weight gain between early adulthood and middle age. TKR and death were recorded with good accuracy, however, year of TKR, year of death and side of TKR were poorly recorded. Patient characteristics recorded in the EHR were comparable to participant characteristics from the NHS, except for OA medication and metastatic solid tumour. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, data relating to the outcome, competing risk and two predictors were unfit for prediction model development. This study highlights the need for more accurate and complete recording of patient data within EHRs if these data are to be used to develop clinical prediction models. Data linkage with other gold standard data sets/registries may in the meantime help overcome some of the current data quality challenges in general practice EHRs when developing prediction models.

The CORE study-An adapted mental health experience codesign intervention to improve psychosocial recovery for people with severe mental illness: A stepped wedge cluster randomized-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Mental health policies outline the need for codesign of services and quality improvement in partnership with service users and staff (and sometimes carers), and yet, evidence of systematic implementation and the impacts on healthcare outcomes is limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test whether an adapted mental health experience codesign intervention to improve recovery-orientation of services led to greater psychosocial recovery outcomes for service users. DESIGN: A stepped wedge cluster randomized-controlled trial was conducted. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Four Mental Health Community Support Services providers, 287 people living with severe mental illnesses, 61 carers and 120 staff were recruited across Victoria, Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 24-item Revised Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS-R) measured individual psychosocial recovery. RESULTS: A total of 841 observations were completed with 287 service users. The intention-to-treat analysis found RAS-R scores to be similar between the intervention (mean = 84.7, SD= 15.6) and control (mean = 86.5, SD= 15.3) phases; the adjusted estimated difference in the mean RAS-R score was -1.70 (95% confidence interval: -3.81 to 0.40; p = .11). DISCUSSION: This first trial of an adapted mental health experience codesign intervention for psychosocial recovery outcomes found no difference between the intervention and control arms. CONCLUSIONS: More attention to the conditions that are required for eight essential mechanisms of change to support codesign processes and implementation is needed. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: The State consumer (Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council) and carer peak bodies (Tandem representing mental health carers) codeveloped the intervention. The adapted intervention was facilitated by coinvestigators with lived-experiences who were coauthors for the trial and process evaluation protocols, the engagement model and explanatory model of change for the trial.

When should matching be used in the design of cluster randomized trials?

For cluster randomized trials (CRTs) with a small number of clusters, the matched-pair (MP) design, where clusters are paired before randomizing one to each trial arm, is often recommended to minimize imbalance on known prognostic factors, add face-validity to the study, and increase efficiency, provided the analysis recognizes the matching. Little evidence exists to guide decisions on when to use matching. We used simulation to compare the efficiency of the MP design with the stratified and simple designs, based on the mean confidence interval width of the estimated intervention effect. Matched and unmatched analyses were used for the MP design; a stratified analysis was used for the stratified design; and analyses without and with post-stratification adjustment for factors that would otherwise have been used for restricted allocation were used for the simple design. Results showed the MP design was generally the most efficient for CRTs with 10 or more pairs when the correlation between cluster-level outcomes within pairs (matching correlation) was moderate to strong (0.3-0.5). There was little gain in efficiency for the MP or stratified designs compared to simple randomization when the matching correlation was weak (0.05-0.1). For trials with four pairs of clusters, the simple and stratified designs were more efficient than the MP design because greater degrees of freedom were available for the analysis, although an unmatched analysis of the MP design recovered precision for weak matching correlations. Practical guidance on choosing between the MP, stratified, and simple designs is provided.

An RCT of a decision aid to support informed choices about taking aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and other chronic diseases: a study protocol for the SITA (Should I Take Aspirin?) trial.

BACKGROUND: Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50-70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice. We aim to test the efficacy of a health consultation and decision aid, using a novel expected frequency tree (EFT) to present the benefits and harms of low dose aspirin prior to a general practice consultation with patients aged 50-70 years, on informed decision-making and uptake of aspirin. METHODS: Approximately five to seven general practices in Victoria, Australia, will be recruited to participate. Patients 50-70 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner (GP) for any reason, will be invited to participate in the trial. Two hundred fifty-eight eligible participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to intervention or active control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice, sex, and mode of trial delivery (face-to-face or teletrial). There are two co-primary outcomes: informed decision-making at 1-month post randomisation, measured by the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), and self-reported daily use of aspirin at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict at 1-month and other behavioural changes to reduce CRC risk at both time points. DISCUSSION: This trial will test the efficacy of novel methods for implementing national guidelines to support informed decision-making about taking aspirin in 50-70-year-olds to reduce the risk of CRC and other chronic diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620001003965 . Registered on 10 October 2020.

Towards optimising chronic kidney disease detection and management in primary care: Underlying theory and protocol for technology development using an Integrated Knowledge Translation approach.

Worldwide, Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), directly or indirectly, causes more than 2.4 million deaths annually with symptoms generally presenting late in the disease course. Clinical guidelines support the early identification and treatment of CKD to delay progression and improve clinical outcomes. This paper reports the protocol for the codesign, implementation and evaluation of a technological platform called Future Health Today (FHT), a software program that aims to optimise early detection and management of CKD in general practice. FHT aims to optimise clinical decision making and reduce practice variation by translating evidence into practice in real time and as a part of quality improvement activities. This protocol describes the co-design and plans for implementation and evaluation of FHT in two general practices invited to test the prototype over 12 months. Service design thinking has informed the design phase and mixed methods will evaluate outcomes following implementation of FHT. Through systematic application of co-design with service users, clinicians and digital technologists, FHT attempts to avoid the pitfalls of past studies that have failed to accommodate the complex requirements and dynamics that can arise between researchers and service users and improve chronic disease management through use of health information technology.