The SIPHER Consortium: Introducing the new UK hub for systems science in public health and health economic research.

The conditions in which we are born, grow, live, work and age are key drivers of health and inequalities in life chances. To maximise health and wellbeing across the whole population, we need well-coordinated action across government sectors, in areas including economic, education, welfare, labour market and housing policy. Current research struggles to offer effective decision support on the cross-sector strategic alignment of policies, and to generate evidence that gives budget holders the confidence to change the way major investment decisions are made. This open letter introduces a new research initiative in this space. The SIPHER ( Systems Science in Public Health and Health Economics Research) Consortium brings together a multi-disciplinary group of scientists from across six universities, three government partners at local, regional and national level, and ten practice partner organisations. The Consortium's vision is a shift from health policy to healthy public policy, where the wellbeing impacts of policies are a core consideration across government sectors. Researchers and policy makers will jointly tackle fundamental questions about: a) the complex causal relationships between upstream policies and wellbeing, economic and equality outcomes; b) the multi-sectoral appraisal of costs and benefits of alternative investment options; c) public values and preferences for different outcomes, and how necessary trade-offs can be negotiated; and d) creating the conditions for intelligence-led adaptive policy design that maximises progress against economic, social and health goals. Whilst our methods will be adaptable across policy topics and jurisdictions, we will initially focus on four policy areas: Inclusive Economic Growth, Adverse Childhood Experiences, Mental Wellbeing and Housing.

Association of Cognition and Age-Related Hearing Impairment in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

Importance: Evidence has linked age-related hearing impairment (ARHI) with cognitive decline; however, very few studies (none in the United Kingdom) explore this link in large well-characterized groups of community-dwelling individuals. Objective: To investigate the link between ARHI and cognitive decline using a cohort of elderly individuals from the United Kingdom and explore untreated hearing loss and social isolation as potential explanations for the observed link. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis of wave 7 (June 2014 through May 2015) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) sampled men and women 50 years or older and living in the United Kingdom in a community setting. Those with a diagnosis of dementia, Alzheimer disease, or Parkinson disease or with ear infections and cochlear implants were excluded. Data were analyzed from August 1, 2017, through May 25, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Memory and executive function as measures of cognitive function and hearing acuity derived from the HearCheck screener device (Siemens). Results: Of a cohort of 9666 members in wave 7 of ELSA, 7385 were eligible for analysis after applying exclusion criteria (55.1% women; mean [SD] age, 67.4 [9.4] years). Of these, 3056 (41.4%) had mild hearing loss and 755 (10.2%) had severe hearing loss; 834 (11.3%) used a hearing aid; and 7155 (96.9%) were white. Hearing loss had a negative association with cognition; for those with moderate to severe loss, the score on memory assessment was a full 1 point less (-1.00; 95% CI, -1.24 to -0.76), ceteris paribus, relative to those with no hearing loss. However, this association was seen only in the individuals with untreated hearing loss (ie, those who did not use hearing aids) (-1.16; 95% CI, -1.45 to -0.87). Evidence suggests that social isolation acts as a mediating factor. Conclusions and Relevance: Although hearing loss and cognition are linked, untreated hearing loss drives the association. Social isolation is a mediating factor in the link for those who have untreated hearing loss. Cognitive decline associated with ARHI is probably preventable by early rehabilitation and increased opportunistic screening for the elderly.

Integrating specialist advice following reforms: an interview-based survey.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the importance of incorporating secondary care input to aid commissioning following National Health Service reforms which will see the replacement of Primary Care Trusts with Clinical Commissioning Groups; to determine barriers that might arise given that this issue had been raised during public consultations and to explore ways to improve this input. DESIGN: Qualitative project with semistructured one-to-one interviews which were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic content analysis by two investigators. The findings were discussed and organized into a framework. SETTING: Bradford and Airedale, UK. PARTICIPANTS: We interviewed 19 participants from primary care, the medical directorship and a range of specialties. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: One-to-one semistructured interviews allowed a flexible dialogue to discuss planned questions and any other themes which participants brought up. This elicited a variety of experiences and ideas which provided the basis for in depth theoretical analysis required for our objectives. RESULTS: There was an almost universal agreement that the integration of secondary care advice is important in commissioning. The main perceived barriers were obstacles to good communication and relationships, conflicts of interest and financial pressures. Participants suggested varied and innovative ways to improve communication and integration, and suggestions for organisations. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the importance of secondary care input and highlight communication, organisation and integration as three goals for organisations to work towards. Successful achievement of these objectives could have financial implications for organisations as well as benefits for patient care.

Principles for high-quality, high-value testing.

A survey of doctors working in two large NHS hospitals identified over 120 laboratory tests, imaging investigations and investigational procedures that they considered not to be overused. A common suggestion in this survey was that more training was required. And, this prompted the development of a list of core principles for high-quality, high-value testing. The list can be used as a framework for training and as a reference source. The core principles are: (1) Base testing practices on the best available evidence. (2) Apply the evidence on test performance with careful judgement. (3) Test efficiently. (4) Consider the value (and affordability) of a test before requesting it. (5) Be aware of the downsides and drivers of overdiagnosis. (6) Confront uncertainties. (7) Be patient-centred in your approach. (8) Consider ethical issues. (9) Be aware of normal cognitive limitations and biases when testing. (10) Follow the 'knowledge journey' when teaching and learning these core principles.