Psychological impact of lung cancer screening using a novel antibody blood test followed by imaging: the ECLS randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Early CDT®-Lung antibody blood test plus serial computed tomography scans for test-positives (TPGs) reduces late-stage lung cancer presentation. This study assessed the psychological outcomes of this approach. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial (n = 12 208) comparing psychological outcomes 1-12 months post-recruitment in a subsample (n = 1032) of TPG, test-negative (TNG) and control groups (CG). RESULTS: Compared to TNG, TPG had lower positive affect (difference between means (DBM), 3 months (3m: -1.49 (-2.65, - 0.33)), greater impact of worries (DBM 1m: 0.26 (0.05, 0.47); 3m: 0.28 (0.07, 0.50)), screening distress (DBM 1m: 3.59 (2.28, 4.90); 3m: 2.29 (0.97, 3.61); 6m: 1.94 (0.61, 3.27)), worry about tests (odds ratio (OR) 1m: 5.79 (2.66, 12.63) and more frequent lung cancer worry (OR 1m: 2.52 (1.31, 4.83); 3m: 2.43 (1.26, 4.68); 6m: 2.87 (1.48, 5.60)). Compared to CG, TPG had greater worry about tests (OR 1m: 3.40 (1.69, 6.84)). TNG had lower negative affect (log-transformed DBM 3m: -0.08 (-0.13, -0.02)), higher positive affect (DBM 1m: 1.52 (0.43, 2.61); 3m: 1.43 (0.33, 2.53); 6m: 1.27 (0.17, 2.37)), less impact of worries (DBM 3m: -0.27 (-0.48, -0.07)) and less-frequent lung cancer worry (OR 3m: 0.49 (0.26, 0.92)). CONCLUSIONS: Negative psychological effects in TPG and positive effects in TNG were short-lived and most differences were small.

Understanding and addressing vaccine hesitancy in the context of COVID-19: development of a digital intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified in late 2019, spreading to over 200 countries and resulting in almost two million deaths worldwide. The emergence of safe and effective vaccines provides a route out of the pandemic, with vaccination uptake of 75-90% needed to achieve population protection. Vaccine hesitancy is problematic for vaccine rollout; global reports suggest only 73% of the population may agree to being vaccinated. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop equitable and accessible interventions to address vaccine hesitancy at the population level. STUDY DESIGN: & Method: We report the development of a scalable digital intervention seeking to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and enhance uptake of COVID-19 vaccines in the United Kingdom. Guided by motivational interviewing (MI) principles, the intervention includes a series of therapeutic dialogues addressing 10 key concerns of vaccine-hesitant individuals. Development of the intervention occurred linearly across four stages. During stage 1, we identified common reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy through analysis of existing survey data, a rapid systematic literature review, and public engagement workshops. Stage 2 comprised qualitative interviews with medical, immunological, and public health experts. Rapid content and thematic analysis of the data provided evidence-based responses to common vaccine concerns. Stage 3 involved the development of therapeutic dialogues through workshops with psychological and digital behaviour change experts. Dialogues were developed to address concerns using MI principles, including embracing resistance and supporting self-efficacy. Finally, stage 4 involved digitisation of the dialogues and pilot testing with members of the public. DISCUSSION: The digital intervention provides an evidence-based approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy through MI principles. The dialogues are user-selected, allowing exploration of relevant issues associated with hesitancy in a non-judgmental context. The text-based content and digital format allow for rapid modification to changing information and scalability for wider dissemination.

The application of protein microarray assays in psychoneuroimmunology.

Protein microarrays are miniaturized multiplex assays that exhibit many advantages over the commonly used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). This article aims to introduce protein microarrays to readers of Brain, Behavior, and Immunity and demonstrate its utility and validity for use in psychoneuroimmunological research. As part of an ongoing investigation of psychological and behavioral influences on influenza vaccination responses, we optimized a novel protein microarray to quantify influenza-specific antibody levels in human sera. Reproducibility was assessed by calculating intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variance on serially diluted human IgG concentrations. A random selection of samples was analyzed by microarray and ELISA to establish validity of the assay. For IgG concentrations, intra-assay and inter-assay precision profiles demonstrated a mean coefficient of variance of 6.7% and 11.5% respectively. Significant correlations were observed between microarray and ELISA for all antigens, demonstrating the microarray is a valid alternative to ELISA. Protein microarrays are a highly robust, novel assay method that could be of significant benefit for researchers working in psychoneuroimmunology. They offer high throughput, fewer resources per analyte and can examine concurrent neuro-immune-endocrine mechanisms.

Using the Medical Research Council framework to develop a complex intervention to improve delivery of care for young people with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: We describe how we have used the development phase of the Medical Research Council (MRC) Guidelines to construct a complex intervention to improve physical and psychological health among young people (16-21 years) with Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: We consulted previous reviews where available and conducted systematic searches of electronic databases to determine physical and mental health among the population, audited medical records, surveyed self-reported psychological health among our clinic population; and interviewed staff (n = 13), young people (n = 27) and parents (n = 18) about their views of current care. RESULTS: Our audit (n = 96) confirmed a high HbA1c [86 mmol/mol (10.0%)] and one third (36.1%) reported significant eating problems. Young people did not attend 12% of their clinic appointments. Staff described difficulties communicating with young people who wanted staff to take account of their individual lifestyle when giving information. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of the systematic reviews and our audit, we concluded that there was sufficient evidence to justify development of a model of care specific to this age group. The components of the complex intervention include changes to standard care, an optional 5-day self-management course directed at young people and a separate family communication programme. The MRC Guidelines provided a valuable structure to guide development and evaluation of this intervention.

The changing vaccine landscape: rates of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy in young adults during vaccine rollout.

AIMS: Development and rollout of vaccines offers the best opportunity for population protection against the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus. However, hesitancy towards the vaccines might impede successful uptake in the United Kingdom, particularly in young adults who demonstrate the highest rates of hesitancy. This prospective study explored COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in young adults and whether the reasons behind these attitudes changed during the initial stages of the United Kingdom's vaccine rollout. METHOD: Data on vaccination intention were collected from a British university student cohort at three time points: October 2020, February 2021, and March 2021. This online survey included items on intention to receive a vaccine and a free-text response for the reasons behind this intention. Cochran's Q tests examined changes in rates of hesitancy and acceptance over time and free-text responses were analysed thematically. RESULTS: At baseline, 893 students provided data, with 476 participants completing all three time points. Hesitancy declined over time, with 29.4% of participants expressing hesitancy at baseline, reducing to 9.1% at wave 2 and 5.9% at wave 3. The most commonly endorsed themes for those willing to accept a vaccine were self-protection against COVID-19 and pro-social reasons, including protecting the population or unspecific others, and ending the pandemic/returning to normal life. The most commonly endorsed hesitancy themes related to 'confidence' in the vaccines and potential personal risk, including insufficient testing/scientific evidence, concern about side effects, and long-term effects. These reasons remained the most commonly endorsed at both waves 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: While a decline in hesitancy was observed over time, the key reasons behind both vaccine acceptance and hesitancy remained consistent. Reasons behind hesitancy aligned with those of the general public, providing support for the use of generalist interventions. Pro-social reasons frequently underpinned vaccine acceptance, so cohort-specific interventions targeting those factors may be of benefit.

How standard is standard care? Exploring control group outcomes in behaviour change interventions for young people with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Poor descriptions of standard care may compromise interpretation of results in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of health interventions. We investigated quality of standard care in RCTs of behaviour change interventions for young people with type 1 diabetes and consider implications for evaluating trial outcomes. DESIGN: We conducted systematic searches for articles published between 1999 and 2012. We extracted standard care descriptions and contacted trial authors to complete a checklist of standard care activities. The relationship between standard care quality and outcomes was examined via subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standard care descriptions, standard care quality, and relationships between standard care quality with medical and psychological outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 20 RCTs described across 26 articles. Published descriptions of standard care were limited to service-level features. Author responses indicated standard care provision extended beyond published accounts. Subgroup analyses suggested control groups receiving higher standard care quality showed larger improvements in both medical and psychological outcomes, although standard care quality did not predict outcomes significantly. CONCLUSION: The quality of care delivered to control group participants can influence outcomes of RCTs. Inadequate reporting exacerbates this issue by masking variations between trials. We argue for increased clarity in reporting standard care in future trials.