Research outcomes informing the selection of public health interventions and strategies to implement them: A cross-sectional survey of Australian policy-maker and practitioner preferences.

BACKGROUND: A key role of public health policy-makers and practitioners is to ensure beneficial interventions are implemented effectively enough to yield improvements in public health. The use of evidence to guide public health decision-making to achieve this is recommended. However, few studies have examined the relative value, as reported by policy-makers and practitioners, of different broad research outcomes (that is, measures of cost, acceptability, and effectiveness). To guide the conduct of research and better inform public health policy and practice, this study aimed at describing the research outcomes that Australian policy-makers and practitioners consider important for their decision-making when selecting: (a) public health interventions; (b) strategies to support their implementation; and (c) to assess the differences in research outcome preferences between policy-makers and practitioners. METHOD: An online value-weighting survey was conducted with Australian public health policy-makers and practitioners working in the field of non-communicable disease prevention. Participants were presented with a list of research outcomes and were asked to select up to five they considered most critical to their decision-making. They then allocated 100 points across these - allocating more points to outcomes perceived as more important. Outcome lists were derived from a review and consolidation of evaluation and outcome frameworks in the fields of public health knowledge translation and implementation. We used descriptive statistics to report relative preferences overall and for policy-makers and practitioners separately. RESULTS: Of the 186 participants; 90 primarily identified as policy-makers and 96 as public health prevention practitioners. Overall, research outcomes of effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and sustainability were identified as the four most important outcomes when considering either interventions or strategies to implement them. Scores were similar for most outcomes between policy-makers and practitioners. CONCLUSION: For Australian policy-makers and practitioners working in the field of non-communicable disease prevention, outcomes related to effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and sustainability appear particularly important to their decisions about the interventions they select and the strategies they employ to implement them. The findings suggest researchers should seek to meet these information needs and prioritize the inclusion of such outcomes in their research and dissemination activities. The extent to which these outcomes are critical to informing the decision of policy-makers and practitioners working in other jurisdictions or contexts warrants further investigation.

Motivations for investigating health inequities in observational epidemiology: a content analysis of 320 studies.

OBJECTIVES: To enhance equity in clinical and epidemiological research, it is crucial to understand researcher motivations for conducting equity-relevant studies. Therefore, we evaluated author motivations in a randomly selected sample of equity-relevant observational studies published during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched MEDLINE for studies from 2020 to 2022, resulting in 16,828 references. We randomly selected 320 studies purposefully sampled across income setting (high vs low-middle-income), COVID-19 topic (vs non-COVID-19), and focus on populations experiencing inequities. Of those, 206 explicitly mentioned motivations which we analyzed thematically. We used discourse analysis to investigate the reasons behind emerging motivations. RESULTS: We identified the following motivations: (1) examining health disparities, (2) tackling social determinants to improve access, and (3) addressing knowledge gaps in health equity. Discourse analysis showed motivations stem from commitments to social justice and recognizing the importance of highlighting it in research. Other discourses included aspiring to improve health-care efficiency, wanting to understand cause-effect relationships, and seeking to contribute to an equitable evidence base. CONCLUSION: Understanding researchers' motivations for assessing health equity can aid in developing guidance that tailors to their needs. We will consider these motivations in developing and sharing equity guidance to better meet researchers' needs.

Unpacking the cost of the lunchbox for Australian families: a secondary analysis.

Ninety per cent of Australian school children bring a home-packed lunch to school, with 44% of the food consumed during school hours being unhealthy. Among other factors, cost is a key consideration for food provision; however, the costs to Australian families are not well understood. Therefore, we aimed to determine what families are currently paying for school lunchboxes in Australian primary schools and to examine associations between food costs and socio-demographic factors with dietary quality. An audit of local retail outlets was used to determine the food costs of lunchbox contents. Costs (AUD) were adjusted for inflation as of early 2023. The lunchboxes of 1026 children aged 4-12 years at 12 Catholic primary schools in New South Wales, Australia, were assessed at the start of the day, using photography assessment methods and a validated School Food Checklist. The mean cost of lunchbox contents was $4.48 AUD (SD 1.53), containing a mean energy of 2699 kJ (SD 859), with 37.3% (SD 23.9) of energy sourced from unhealthy foods. Multiple linear regression analyses found that the strongest predictors of higher lunchbox cost (P < 0.05) were a higher proportion of energy from unhealthy foods (B = 0.016) and lower Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (B = -0.178), when controlling for child socio-demographics. The results indicated that lunchbox food costs to Australian families are comparable to alternative school food service models in Australia and internationally. Results demonstrate the cost of food is not the only barrier to providing a healthy school lunchbox. Demonstrating a need for cost-considerate systematic interventions addressing food provision challenges and socio-economic disparities faced by families.

Assessing the scalability of healthy eating interventions within the early childhood education and care setting: secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Early childhood education and care (ECEC) is a recommended setting for the delivery of health eating interventions 'at scale' (i.e. to large numbers of childcare services) to improve child public health nutrition. Appraisal of the 'scalability' (suitability for delivery at scale) of interventions is recommended to guide public health decision-making. This study describes the extent to which factors required to assess scalability are reported among ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. DESIGN: Studies from a recent Cochrane systematic review assessing the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC for improving child dietary intake were included. The reporting of factors of scalability was assessed against domains outlined within the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT). The tool recommends decision makers consider the problem, the intervention, strategic and political context, effectiveness, costs, fidelity and adaptation, reach and acceptability, delivery setting and workforce, implementation infrastructure and sustainability. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. SETTING: ECEC. PARTICIPANTS: Children 6 months to 6 years. RESULTS: Of thirty-eight included studies, none reported all factors within the ISAT. All studies reported the problem, the intervention, effectiveness and the delivery workforce and setting. The lowest reported domains were intervention costs (13 % of studies) and sustainability (16 % of studies). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate there is a lack of reporting of some key factors of scalability for ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. Future studies should measure and report such factors to support policy and practice decision makers when selecting interventions to be scaled-up.

Disseminating health research to public health policy-makers and practitioners: a survey of source, message content and delivery modality preferences.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the views of policy-makers and practitioners regarding how best to communicate research evidence is important to support research use in their decision-making. AIM: To quantify and describe public health policy-makers and practitioners' views regarding the source, content and form of messages describing public health research findings to inform their decision-making. We also sought to examine differences in preferences between public health policy-makers and practitioners. METHODS: A cross sectional, value-weighting survey of policy-makers and practitioners was conducted. Participants were asked to allocate a proportion of 100 points across different (i) sources of research evidence, (ii) message content and (iii) the form in which evidence is presented. Points were allocated based on their rating of influence, usefulness and preference when making decisions about health policy or practice. RESULTS: A total of 186 survey responses were received from 90 policy-makers and 96 practitioners. Researchers and government department agencies were the most influential source of research evidence based on mean allocation of points, followed by knowledge brokers, professional peers and associations. Mean point allocation for perceived usefulness of message content was highest for simple summary of key findings and implications, and then evidence-based recommendations and data and statistical summaries. Finally, based on mean scores, policy-makers and practitioners preferred to receive research evidence in the form of peer-reviewed publications, reports, evidence briefs and plain language summaries. There were few differences in scores between policy-makers and practitioners across source, message content or form assessments or those with experience in different behavioural areas. CONCLUSIONS: The findings should provide a basis for the future development and optimization of dissemination strategies to this important stakeholder group.

Development and piloting of a Community of Practice to support learning and improvement in health promotion practice within NSW local health district.

OBJECTIVES: Health Promotion Units within New South Wales (NSW) local health districts (LHDs) frequently collaborate and test innovations to address priority health issues or approaches to support the implementation of a health promotion program in a way that is consistent with the needs, resources, and contexts of their regions. Compatible with learning health system approaches, mechanisms to facilitate the exchange of evidence and expertise across districts could improve the collective impact of health promotion services across the state. This study aimed to assess the use of a health promotion Community of Practice (CoP) model as a strategy to achieve this. Type of program or service: This paper describes and shares experiences from the development and piloting process of a CoP model to develop, evaluate and exchange learnings to improve approaches to support the adoption of an effective healthy lunchbox program ('SWAP IT') across three LHDs. RESULTS: The functioning of the CoP was supported by key activities, funding and infrastructure over a 2-year period, including: planning workshops, implementation check-ins, and knowledge exchange meetings. A particularly novel aspect of the CoP was the harmonised evaluation of different, locally developed strategies to facilitate program adoption across the three LHDs. The alignment of the CoP with local and state priorities, as well as the operation of the CoP in a way that did not impose significant time demands, was seen as important for the sustainability of the CoP. LESSONS LEARNT: Findings from the piloting process suggest that a formalised CoP shows promise as an effective model to enhance health promotion collaboration, information sharing and practice across LHDs, which may be suitable for broader application across the state.

Evaluating the scaling up of an effective implementation intervention (PACE) to increase the delivery of a mandatory physical activity policy in primary schools.

BACKGROUND: Physically Active Children in Education (PACE) is an effective implementation intervention for increasing the number of minutes classroom teachers schedule physical activity each week. To date, evaluations of PACE have included a smaller number of schools from only one region in New South Wales Australia. If PACE is to have population-wide benefits we must be able to deliver this support to a larger number of schools across multiple regions. This study aimed to evaluate the scale-up of PACE. METHODS: An uncontrolled before and after study, with 100 schools from three regions was conducted. Participating schools received PACE for approximately 12 months. We assessed the following outcomes: delivery of the evidence-based intervention (EBI) (i.e. minutes of physical activity scheduled by classroom teachers per week); delivery of the implementation strategies (i.e. reach, dose delivered, adherence and indicators of sustainability); and key determinants of implementation (i.e. acceptability of strategies and cost). Data were collected via project officer records, and principal and teacher surveys. Linear mixed models were used to assess EBI delivery by evaluating the difference in the mean minutes teachers scheduled physical activity per week from baseline to follow-up. Descriptive data were used to assess delivery of the implementation strategies and their perceived acceptability (i.e. PACE). A prospective, trial-based economic evaluation was used to assess cost. RESULTS: Delivery of the EBI was successful: teachers increas their average minutes of total physical activity scheduled across the school week by 26.8 min (95% CI: 21.2, 32.4, p < 0.001) after receiving PACE. Indicators for delivery of implementation strategies were high: 90% of consenting schools received all strategies and components (reach); 100% of strategies were delivered by the provider (dose); >50% of schools adhered to the majority of strategies (11 of the 14 components); and acceptability was > 50% agreement for all strategies. The incremental cost per additional minute of physical activity scheduled per week was $27 per school (Uncertainty Interval $24, $31). CONCLUSIONS: PACE can be successfully delivered across multiple regions and to a large number of schools. Given the ongoing and scalable benefits of PACE, it is important that we continue to extend and improve this program while considering ways to reduce the associated cost.

A scoping review establishes need for consensus guidance on reporting health equity in observational studies.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the support from the available guidance on reporting of health equity in research for our candidate items and to identify additional items for the Strengthening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology-Equity extension. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a scoping review by searching Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Methodology Register, LILACS, and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information up to January 2022. We also searched reference lists and gray literature for additional resources. We included guidance and assessments (hereafter termed "resources") related to conduct and/or reporting for any type of health research with or about people experiencing health inequity. RESULTS: We included 34 resources, which supported one or more candidate items or contributed to new items about health equity reporting in observational research. Each candidate item was supported by a median of six (range: 1-15) resources. In addition, 12 resources suggested 13 new items, such as "report the background of investigators". CONCLUSION: Existing resources for reporting health equity in observational studies aligned with our interim checklist of candidate items. We also identified additional items that will be considered in the development of a consensus-based and evidence-based guideline for reporting health equity in observational studies.

Evidence on Scaling in Health and Social Care: An Umbrella Review.

Policy Points More rigorous methodologies and systematic approaches should be encouraged in the science of scaling. This will help researchers better determine the effectiveness of scaling, guide stakeholders in the scaling process, and ultimately increase the impacts of health innovations. The practice and the science of scaling need to expand worldwide to address complex health conditions such as noncommunicable and chronic diseases. Although most of the scaling experiences described in the literature are occurring in the Global South, most of the authors publishing on it are based in the Global North. As the science of scaling spreads across the world with the aim of reducing health inequities, it is also essential to address the power imbalance in how we do scaling research globally. CONTEXT: Scaling of effective innovations in health and social care is essential to increase their impact. We aimed to synthesize the evidence base on scaling and identify current knowledge gaps. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual. We included any type of review that 1) focused on scaling, 2) covered health or social care, and 3) presented a methods section. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), Academic Search Premier (EBSCO), and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global from their inception to August 6, 2020. We searched the gray literature using, e.g., Google and WHO-ExpandNet. We assessed methodological quality with AMSTAR2. Paired reviewers independently selected and extracted eligible reviews and assessed study quality. A narrative synthesis was performed. FINDINGS: Of 24,269 records, 137 unique reviews were included. The quality of the 58 systematic reviews was critically low (n = 42). The most frequent review type was systematic review (n = 58). Most reported on scaling in low- and middle-income countries (n = 59), whereas most first authors were from high-income countries (n = 114). Most reviews concerned infectious diseases (n = 36) or maternal-child health (n = 28). They mainly focused on interventions (n = 37), barriers and facilitators (n = 29), frameworks (n = 24), scalability (n = 24), and costs (n = 14). The WHO/ExpandNet scaling definition was the definition most frequently used (n = 26). Domains most reported as influencing scaling success were building scaling infrastructure (e.g., creating new service sites) and human resources (e.g., training community health care providers). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base on scaling is evolving rapidly as reflected by publication trends, the range of focus areas, and diversity of scaling definitions. Our study highlights knowledge gaps around methodology and research infrastructures to facilitate equitable North-South research relationships. Common efforts are needed to ensure scaling expands the impacts of health and social innovations to broader populations.

Describing the evidence-base for research engagement by health care providers and health care organisations: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Having a research-engaged health and medical workforce is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes for patients. As such, there has been significant government investment internationally to support health care organisations and services to increase staff engagement with research. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review sought to provide an overview of the literature describing strategies employed to increase research engagement by health care providers and organisations, and to undertake a qualitative analysis to generate a list of research engagement strategies. METHODS: A scoping review using systematic search strategies was undertaken to locate peer-review publications and grey literature related to research engagement by health care providers and organisations. Research engagement was defined as a 'deliberate set of intellectual and practical activities undertaken by health care staff and organisations to conduct research'. A database search of electronic records was performed with no limit on publication date. Publications were included regardless of study type (excluding systematic reviews) and categorised as either databased (presenting data or new analysis of existing data) and non-databased (no new data or analyses). Databased publications were further classified according to study type, study design and setting. A qualitative synthesis using a Framework Approach was undertaken with all studies that described a strategy to improve research engagement. RESULTS: A total of 152 publications were included in this study with 54% categorised as non-databased. Of the databased articles, the majority (72%) were descriptive studies describing prevalence of correlates of research engagement, 17 (25%) described intervention studies where only two were controlled studies. The following research engagement strategies were identified: i) dual skilled team/staff, ii) resources or physical infrastructure, iii) incentives, iv) leadership support of research, v) education/training, vi) networks, vii) forming partnerships or collaborations and viii) overall leadership structure of entity. CONCLUSIONS: The literature on research engagement is primarily opinion-based and descriptive in nature. To provide the evidence needed to inform strategies, this needs to progress beyond descriptive to more rigorous well-designed intervention research.

Nurturing children's development through healthy eating and active living: Time for policies to support effective interventions in the context of responsive emotional support and early learning.

Fostering the growth, development, health, and wellbeing of children is a global priority. The early childhood period presents a critical window to influence lifelong trajectories, however urgent multisectoral action is needed to ensure that families are adequately supported to nurture their children's growth and development. With a shared vision to give every child the best start in life, thus helping them reach their full developmental potential, we have formed the International Healthy Eating Active Living Matters (HEALing Matters) Alliance. Together, we form a global network of academics and practitioners working across child health and development, and who are dedicated to improving health equity for children and their families. Our goal is to ensure that all families are free from structural inequality and oppression and are empowered to nurture their children's growth and development through healthy eating and physical activity within the context of responsive emotional support, safety and security, and opportunities for early learning. To date, there have been disparate approaches to promoting these objectives across the health, community service, and education sectors. The crucial importance of our collective work is to bring these priorities for early childhood together through multisectoral interventions, and in so doing tackle head on siloed approaches. In this Policy paper, we draw upon extensive research and call for collective action to promote equity and foster positive developmental trajectories for all children. We call for the delivery of evidence-based programs, policies, and services that are co-designed to meet the needs of all children and families and address structural and systemic inequalities. Moving beyond the "what" is needed to foster the best start to life for all children, we provide recommendations of "how" we can do this. Such collective impact will facilitate intergenerational progression that builds human capital in future generations.

Strategies for enhancing the implementation of school-based policies or practices targeting diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco or alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: Several school-based interventions are effective in improving child diet and physical activity, and preventing excessive weight gain, and tobacco or harmful alcohol use. However, schools are frequently unsuccessful in implementing such evidence-based interventions. OBJECTIVES: 1. To evaluate the benefits and harms of strategies aiming to improve school implementation of interventions to address student diet, physical activity, tobacco or alcohol use, and obesity. 2. To evaluate the benefits and harms of strategies to improve intervention implementation on measures of student diet, physical activity, obesity, tobacco use or alcohol use; describe their cost or cost-effectiveness; and any harms of strategies on schools, school staff or students. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was between 1 September 2016 and 30 April 2021 to identify any relevant trials published since the last published review. SELECTION CRITERIA: We defined 'Implementation' as the use of strategies to adopt and integrate evidence-based health interventions and to change practice patterns within specific settings. We included any trial (randomised controlled trial (RCT) or non-randomised controlled trial (non-RCT)) conducted at any scale, with a parallel control group that compared a strategy to implement policies or practices to address diet, physical activity, overweight or obesity, tobacco or alcohol use by students to 'no intervention', 'usual' practice or a different implementation strategy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Given the large number of outcomes reported, we selected and included the effects of a single outcome measure for each trial for the primary (implementation) and secondary (student health behaviour and obesity) outcomes using a decision hierarchy. Where possible, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) to account for variable outcome measures with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For RCTs, we conducted meta-analyses of primary and secondary outcomes using a random-effects model, or in instances where there were between two and five studies, a fixed-effect model. The synthesis of the effects for non-randomised studies followed the 'Synthesis without meta-analysis' (SWiM) guidelines. MAIN RESULTS: We included an additional 11 trials in this update bringing the total number of included studies in the review to 38. Of these, 22 were conducted in the USA. Twenty-six studies used RCT designs. Seventeen trials tested strategies to implement healthy eating, 12 physical activity and six a combination of risk factors. Just one trial sought to increase the implementation of interventions to delay initiation or reduce the consumption of alcohol. All trials used multiple implementation strategies, the most common being educational materials, educational outreach and educational meetings. The overall certainty of evidence was low and ranged from very low to moderate for secondary review outcomes. Pooled analyses of RCTs found, relative to a control, the use of implementation strategies may result in a large increase in the implementation of interventions in schools (SMD 1.04, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.34; 22 RCTs, 1917 participants; low-certainty evidence). For secondary outcomes we found, relative to control, the use of implementation strategies to support intervention implementation may result in a slight improvement on measures of student diet (SMD 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.15; 11 RCTs, 16,649 participants; low-certainty evidence) and physical activity (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.19; 9 RCTs, 16,389 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effects on obesity probably suggest little to no difference (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02; 8 RCTs, 18,618 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The effects on tobacco use are very uncertain (SMD -0.03, 95% CIs -0.23 to 0.18; 3 RCTs, 3635 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One RCT assessed measures of student alcohol use and found strategies to support implementation may result in a slight increase in use (odds ratio 1.10, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.56; P = 0.60; 2105 participants). Few trials reported the economic evaluations of implementation strategies, the methods of which were heterogeneous and evidence graded as very uncertain. A lack of consistent terminology describing implementation strategies was an important limitation of the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The use of implementation strategies may result in large increases in implementation of interventions, and slight improvements in measures of student diet, and physical activity. Further research is required to assess the impact of implementation strategies on such behavioural- and obesity-related outcomes, including on measures of alcohol use, where the findings of one trial suggest it may slightly increase student risk. Given the low certainty of the available evidence for most measures further research is required to guide efforts to facilitate the translation of evidence into practice in this setting.

Iterative delivery of an implementation support package to increase and sustain the routine provision of antenatal care addressing alcohol consumption during pregnancy: study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster trial.

INTRODUCTION: Antenatal care addressing alcohol consumption during pregnancy is not routinely delivered in maternity services. Although a number of implementation trials have reported significant increases in such care, the majority of women still did not receive all recommended care elements, and improvements dissipated over time. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of an iteratively developed and delivered implementation support package in: (1) increasing the proportion of pregnant women who receive antenatal care addressing alcohol consumption and (2) sustaining the rate of care over time. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A stepped-wedge cluster trial will be conducted as a second phase of a previous trial. All public maternity services within three sectors of a local health district in Australia will receive an implementation support package that was developed based on an assessment of outcomes and learnings following the initial trial. The package will consist of evidence-based strategies to support increases in care provision (remind clinicians; facilitation; conduct educational meetings) and sustainment (develop a formal implementation blueprint; purposely re-examine the implementation; conduct ongoing training). Measurement of outcomes will occur via surveys with women who attend antenatal appointments each week. Primary outcomes will be the proportion of women who report being asked about alcohol consumption at subsequent antenatal appointments; and receiving complete care (advice and referral) relative to alcohol risk at initial and subsequent antenatal appointments. Economic and process evaluation measures will also be reported. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained through the Hunter New England (16/11/16/4.07, 16/10/19/5.15) and University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committees (H-2017-0032, H-2016-0422) and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (1236/16). Trial findings will be disseminated to health service decision makers to inform the feasibility of conducting additional cycles to further improve antenatal care addressing alcohol consumption as well as at scientific conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622000295741).

Economic evaluation of a multi-strategy intervention that improves school-based physical activity policy implementation.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, government policies mandating schools to provide students with opportunities to participate in physical activity are poorly implemented. The multi-component Physically Active Children in Education (PACE) intervention effectively assists schools to implement one such policy. We evaluated the value of investment by health service providers tasked with intervention delivery, and explored where adaptations might be targeted to reduce program costs for scale-up. METHODS: A prospective trial-based economic evaluation of an implementation intervention in 61 primary schools in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Schools were randomised to the PACE intervention or a wait-list control. PACE strategies included centralised technical assistance, ongoing consultation, principal's mandated change, identifying and preparing in-school champions, educational outreach visits, and provision of educational materials and equipment. Effectiveness was measured as the mean weekly minutes of physical activity implemented by classroom teachers, recorded in a daily log book at baseline and 12-month follow-up. Delivery costs (reported in $AUD, 2018) were evaluated from a public finance perspective. Cost data were used to calculate: total intervention cost, cost per strategy and incremental cost (overall across all schools and as an average per school). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the incremental cost of delivering PACE divided by the estimated intervention effect. RESULTS: PACE cost the health service provider a total of $35,692 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] $32,411, $38,331) to deliver; an average cost per school of $1151 (95%UI $1046, $1236). Training in-school champions was the largest contributor: $19,437 total; $627 ($0 to $648) average per school. Educational outreach was the second largest contributor: $4992 total; $161 ($0 to $528) average per school. The ICER was $29 (95%UI $17, $64) for every additional minute of weekly physical activity implemented per school. CONCLUSION: PACE is a potentially cost-effective intervention for increasing schools implementation of a policy mandate. The investment required by the health service provider makes use of existing funding and infrastructure; the additional cost to assist schools to implement the policy is likely not that much. PACE strategies may be adapted to substantially improve delivery costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617001265369; Prospectively registered 1st September 2017 https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373520.

A randomised controlled trial of an implementation strategy delivered at scale to increase outdoor free play opportunities in early childhood education and care (ECEC) services: a study protocol for the get outside get active (GOGA) trial.

BACKGROUND: Increased outdoor play time in young children is associated with many health and developmental benefits. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a multi-strategy implementation strategy delivered at scale, to increase opportunities for outdoor free play in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) services. METHODS: The study will employ a parallel-group randomised controlled trial design. One hundred ECEC services in the Hunter New England region of New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised to receive either a 6-month implementation strategy or usual care. The trial will seek to increase the implementation of an indoor-outdoor routine (whereby children are allowed to move freely between indoor and outdoor spaces during periods of free play), to increase their opportunity to engage in outdoor free play. Development of the strategy was informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel to address determinants identified in the Theoretical Domains Framework. ECEC services allocated to the control group will receive 'usual' implementation support delivered as part of state-wide obesity prevention programs. The primary trial outcome is the mean minutes/day (calculated across 5 consecutive days) of outdoor free play opportunities provided in ECEC services measured at baseline, 6-months (primary end point) and 18-months post baseline. Analyses will be performed using an intention-to-treat approach with ECEC services as the unit of analysis, using a linear mixed effects regression model to assess between-group differences. A sensitivity analysis will be undertaken, adjusting for service characteristics that appear imbalanced between groups at baseline, and a subgroup analysis examining potential intervention effect among services with the lowest baseline outdoor free play opportunities. DISCUSSION: Identifying effective strategies to support the implementation of indoor-outdoor routines in the ECEC setting at scale is essential to improve child population health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12621000987864 ). Prospectively registered 27th July 2021, ANZCTR - Registration.

Cost, cost-consequence and cost-effectiveness evaluation of a practice change intervention to increase routine provision of antenatal care addressing maternal alcohol consumption.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of antenatal clinical guideline recommendations for addressing maternal alcohol consumption is sub-optimal. There is a complete absence of evidence of the cost and cost-effectiveness of delivering practice change interventions addressing maternal alcohol consumption amongst women accessing maternity services. The study sought to determine the cost, cost-consequence and cost-effectiveness of developing and delivering a multi-strategy practice change intervention in three sectors of a health district in New South Wales, Australia. METHODS: The trial-based economic analyses compared the costs and outcomes of the intervention to usual care over the 35-month period of the stepped-wedge trial. A health service provider perspective was selected to focus on the cost of delivering the practice change intervention, rather than the cost of delivering antenatal care itself. All costs are reported in Australian dollars ($AUD, 2019). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed the effect of variation in intervention effect and costs. RESULTS: The total cost of delivering the practice change intervention across all three sectors was $367,646, of which $40,871 (11%) were development costs and $326,774 (89%) were delivery costs. Labour costs comprised 70% of the total intervention delivery cost. A single practice change strategy, 'educational meetings and educational materials' contributed 65% of the delivery cost. Based on the trial's primary efficacy outcome, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio was calculated to be $32,570 (95% CI: $32,566-$36,340) per percent increase in receipt of guideline recommended care. Based on the number of women attending the maternity services during the trial period, the average incremental cost per woman who received all guideline elements was $591 (Range: $329 - $940) . The average cost of the intervention per eligible clinician was $993 (Range: $640-$1928). CONCLUSION: The intervention was more effective than usual care, at an increased cost. Healthcare funders' willingness to pay for this incremental effect is unknown. However, the strategic investment in systems change is expected to improve the efficiency of the practice change intervention over time. Given the positive trial findings, further research and monitoring is required to assess the sustainability of intervention effectiveness and whether economies of scale, or reduced costs of intervention delivery can be achieved without impact on outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, No. ACTRN12617000882325 (date registered: 16/06/2017).

Effectiveness of referral to a population-level telephone coaching service for improving health risk behaviours in people with a mental health condition: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: People with a mental health condition have a shorter life expectancy than the general population. This is largely attributable to higher rates of chronic disease and a higher prevalence of modifiable health risk behaviours including tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption, poor nutrition, and physical inactivity. Telephone support services offer a viable option to provide support to reduce these health risk behaviours at a population-level; however, whilst there is some research pertaining to Quitlines, there is limited other research investigating whether telephone services may offer effective support for people with a mental health condition. This protocol describes a randomised controlled trial that aims to evaluate the referral of people with a mental health condition to a population-level telephone coaching service to increase physical activity, healthy eating, or weight management, and increase attempts to do so. METHODS: A parallel-group randomised controlled trial will be conducted recruiting participants with a mental health condition through community mental health services and advertisement on social media. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either a health information pack only (control) or a health information pack and a proactive referral to a free, government-funded telephone coaching service, the NSW Get Healthy Coaching and Information Service® (intervention), which offers up to 13 telephone coaching calls with a University Qualified Health Coach to assist with client-identified goals relating to physical activity, healthy eating, weight management, or alcohol reduction. Data will be collected via telephone surveys at baseline and 6 months post-recruitment. Primary outcomes are as follows: (1) minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per week, (2) serves of fruit consumed per day, (3) serves of vegetables consumed per day, and (4) a composite measure assessing attempts to change at least one health risk behaviour (any attempts to change physical activity, fruit consumption, vegetable consumption, or other parts of nutrition). Secondary outcomes include weight and body mass index. DISCUSSION: This study is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of referral to a population-level telephone support service for reducing health risk behaviours relating to physical activity, healthy eating, and weight in people with a mental health condition. Results will inform future policy and practice regarding the delivery of telephone-based behaviour change coaching services and the management of physical health for this population to reduce health inequity and the burden of chronic disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620000351910 . Retrospectively registered on 12 March 2020.

A Systematic Review of the Recent Consumption Levels of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages in Children and Adolescents From the World Health Organization Regions With High Dietary-Related Burden of Disease.

This review aimed to investigate national estimates of sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption in children and adolescents aged two to 18 years, from countries in regions particularly burdened by dietary-related chronic illnesses. The most recent studies or reports from included countries (n = 73) with national-level consumption data of SSBs in children and adolescents, collected between January 2010 and October 2019, were considered for inclusion. A random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate pooled estimates of the mean consumption of SSB in millimeters per day. Heterogeneity between national estimates was assessed using the I2 statistic and explored via subgroup analyses by the World Health Organization region, age groups, and country-level income. Forty-eight studies were included in the review reporting national estimates of consumption for 51 countries. The highest estimate of daily consumption was in China at 710.0 mL (95% confidence interval (CI) [698.8, 721.2], while the lowest was in Australia at 115.1 mL (95% CI [111.2, 119.1]). Pooled synthesis of daily SSB consumption of the 51 countries was 326.0 mL (95% CI [288.3, 363.8]), although heterogeneity was high, and was not explained by subgroup analyses. While there is considerable variability between countries, intake of SSB remains high among children and adolescents internationally underscoring the need for public health efforts to reduce SSBs consumption.

Cost and Cost Effectiveness of a Pilot m-Health Intervention Targeting Parents of School-Aged Children to Improve the Nutritional Quality of Foods Packed in the Lunchbox.

The SWAP IT program aims to improve the nutritional quality of school lunchboxes via a multicomponent m-health intervention, involving: weekly support messages to parents; physical resources; school nutrition guidelines and lunchbox lessons. SWAP IT has been reported to be effective. This study aims to determine the cost and cost effectiveness of the SWAP IT m-health intervention. The retrospective trial-based economic evaluation was conducted in 12 Catholic primary schools in New South Wales, Australia. Schools were randomised to intervention or usual care. The costs (AUD, 2019) were evaluated from societal perspectives. The direct cost to uptake the intervention and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. ICERS were calculated for two outcomes: reduction in total kJ and reduction in discretionary kJ from the lunchbox. The total cost was calculated to be AUD 55, 467. The mean incremental cost per student to receive the intervention was calculated to be AUD 31/student. The cost per reduction in total lunchbox energy was AUD 0.54. The ICER for the reduction in energy from discretionary foods in the lunchbox was AUD 0.24. These findings suggest that this m-health intervention has potential to be cost effective in reducing the kilojoules from discretionary foods packed in school lunchboxes.

A trial of a six-month sugar-sweetened beverage intervention in secondary schools from a socio-economically disadvantaged region in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the effectiveness of a school-based intervention in reducing adolescents' sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption and percentage of energy from SSBs. Secondary outcomes were SSB consumption within school, average daily energy intake, and body mass index z-scores. METHODS: Six secondary schools located in New South Wales, Australia were recruited to participate in a six-month pilot randomised controlled trial (1:1). The intervention included components targeting the school nutrition environment, curricula and community. Outcomes were collected via online surveys, observations, anthropometric measurements and project records. Between-group differences were assessed via linear mixed models. RESULTS: At the six-month intervention endpoint (n=862) there were no statistically significant differences between students in intervention or control schools for mean daily intake of SSBs (8.55mL; CI -26.77, 43.87; p=0.63), percentage daily energy from SSBs (0.12% kJ; CI -0.55, 0.80; p=0.72), or for secondary outcomes. Acceptability of the school-based strategies were high, however intervention fidelity varied across schools. CONCLUSION: While acceptable, improving fidelity of implementation and increasing the duration or intensity of the intervention may be required to reduce SSB intake. Implications for public health: Engaging parents and education stakeholders in the development phase to co-design interventions may prove beneficial in improving intervention fidelity and enhance behavioural outcomes.