Risk factors for developing COVID-19: a population-based longitudinal study (COVIDENCE UK).

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for severe COVID-19 include older age, male sex, obesity, black or Asian ethnicity and underlying medical conditions. Whether these factors also influence susceptibility to developing COVID-19 is uncertain. METHODS: We undertook a prospective, population-based cohort study (COVIDENCE UK) from 1 May 2020 to 5 February 2021. Baseline information on potential risk factors was captured by an online questionnaire. Monthly follow-up questionnaires captured incident COVID-19. We used logistic regression models to estimate multivariable-adjusted ORs (aORs) for associations between potential risk factors and odds of COVID-19. RESULTS: We recorded 446 incident cases of COVID-19 in 15 227 participants (2.9%). Increased odds of developing COVID-19 were independently associated with Asian/Asian British versus white ethnicity (aOR 2.28, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.91), household overcrowding (aOR per additional 0.5 people/bedroom 1.26, 1.11 to 1.43), any versus no visits to/from other households in previous week (aOR 1.31, 1.06 to 1.62), number of visits to indoor public places (aOR per extra visit per week 1.05, 1.02 to 1.09), frontline occupation excluding health/social care versus no frontline occupation (aOR 1.49, 1.12 to 1.98) and raised body mass index (BMI) (aOR 1.50 (1.19 to 1.89) for BMI 25.0-30.0 kg/m2 and 1.39 (1.06 to 1.84) for BMI >30.0 kg/m2 versus BMI <25.0 kg/m2). Atopic disease was independently associated with decreased odds (aOR 0.75, 0.59 to 0.97). No independent associations were seen for age, sex, other medical conditions, diet or micronutrient supplement use. CONCLUSIONS: After rigorous adjustment for factors influencing exposure to SARS-CoV-2, Asian/Asian British ethnicity and raised BMI were associated with increased odds of developing COVID-19, while atopic disease was associated with decreased odds. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04330599).

Development of a biochemical marker to detect current breast milk intake.

The WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months, but despite interventions, breastfeeding rates remain stubbornly low. Financial voucher incentives have shown promise but require a biomarker for validation of intake. This study aimed to develop a simple biochemical assay of infant urine that would tell if an infant was receiving any breast milk to validate maternal report. Urine samples were collected and snap frozen from 34 infants attending with minor illness or feeding problems, of whom 12 infants were exclusively breastfed, nine exclusively formula fed, and 11 mixed breast/formula fed. High-performance anion exchange chromatography was used to identify discriminating patterns of monosaccharide composition of unconjugated glycans in a sequence of three experiments. The absolute concentration of all human milk oligosaccharides measured blind could detect "any breastfeeding" only with a sensitivity of 48% and specificity of 78%. Unblinded examination of N-acetylglucosamine (GlcNAc) measured as GlcNH2 after hydrolysis of GlcNAc improved sensitivity to 75% at the expense of a specificity of 28%. Estimation of the relative abundance of GlcNH2 (GlcNH2[%]) or the ratio of GlcNH2 to endogenous mannose (Man) improved accuracy. In a further blind experiment, the GlcNH2/Man ratio with a cut-off of 1.5 correctly identified all those receiving "any breast milk," while excluding exclusively formula fed infants. The GlcNH2/Man ratio in infant urine is a promising test to provide biochemical confirmation of any breastfeeding for trials of breastfeeding promotion.

Rethinking ADHD intervention trials: feasibility testing of two treatments and a methodology.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a lifelong condition associated with considerable costs. The long-term effectiveness and acceptability of treatments to improve outcomes remains in doubt. Long-term trials are needed comparing interventions with standard care and each other. The Sheffield Treatments for ADHD Research (STAR) project used the Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) approach. A cohort of children with ADHD was recruited and outcomes collected from carers and teachers. A random selection was offered treatment by homoeopaths (hom) or nutritional therapists (NT). Their outcomes (Conners Global ADHD Index) were compared with those not offered interventions. The feasibility of the methods and interventions was assessed. The TwiCs approach was feasible with modifications. 144 participants were recruited to the cohort, 83 offered treatment, 72 accepted, and 50 attended 1+ appointments. Results according to carers assessments at 6 months were as follows: t = 1.08, p = .28 (- 1.48, 4.81) SMD .425 (hom); t = 1.71, p = .09 (- .347, 5.89), SMD = .388 (NT). Teachers' responses were too few and unstable. No serious treatment adverse events occurred.Conclusion: the STAR project demonstrated the feasibility of the TwiCs approach for testing interventions for children with ADHD. What is Known: • Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a lifelong condition associated with considerable costs to ADHD stakeholders. Children are at risk of negative outcomes and in need of pre-emptive strategies • The long-term effectiveness and acceptability of recommended treatments to improve outcomes remains in doubt What is New: • A small-scale test of the design demonstrated that the Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) approach is feasible and can make a useful contribution regarding testing the effectiveness of interventions for children with ADHD to improve long-term negative outcomes • Treatment by homoeopaths and nutritional therapists may offer novel opportunities to improve outcomes.

Ethics and practice of Trials within Cohorts: An emerging pragmatic trial design.

BACKGROUND: With increasing emphasis on pragmatic trials, new randomized clinical trial designs are being proposed to enhance the "real world" nature of the data generated. We describe one such design, appropriate for unmasked pragmatic clinical trials in which the control arm receives usual care, called "Trials within Cohorts" that is increasingly used in various countries because of its efficiency in recruitment, advantages in reducing subject burden, and ability to better mimic real-world consent processes. METHODS: Descriptive, ethical, and US regulatory analysis of the Trials within Cohorts design. RESULTS: Trials within Cohorts design involves, after recruitment into a cohort, randomization of eligible subjects, followed by an asymmetric treatment of the two arms: those selected for the experimental arm provide informed consent for the intervention trial, while the data from the control arm are used based on prior broad permission. Thus, unlike the traditional Zelen post-randomization consent design, the cohort participants are informed about future research within the cohort; however, the extent of this disclosure currently varies among studies. Thus, ethical analysis is provided for two types of situations: when the pre-randomization disclosure and consent regarding the embedded trials are fairly explicit and detailed versus when they consist of only general statements about future data use. These differing ethical situations could have implications for how ethics review committees apply US research rules regarding waivers and alterations of informed consent. CONCLUSION: Trials within Cohorts is a promising new pragmatic randomized controlled trial design that is being increasingly used in various countries. Although the asymmetric consent procedures for the experimental versus control arm subjects can initially raise ethical concerns, it is ethically superior to previous post-randomization consent designs and can have important advantages over traditional trial designs.

Valuing breastfeeding: a qualitative study of women's experiences of a financial incentive scheme for breastfeeding.

BACKGROUND: A cluster randomised controlled trial of a financial incentive for breastfeeding conducted in areas with low breastfeeding rates in the UK reported a statistically significant increase in breastfeeding at 6-8 weeks. In this paper we report an analysis of interviews with women eligible for the scheme, exploring their experiences and perceptions of the scheme and its impact on breastfeeding to support the interpretation of the results of the trial. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 35 women eligible for the scheme during the feasibility and trial stages. All interviews were recorded and verbatim transcripts analysed using a Framework Analysis approach. RESULTS: Women reported that their decisions about infant feeding were influenced by the behaviours and beliefs of their family and friends, socio-cultural norms and by health and practical considerations. They were generally positive about the scheme, and felt valued for the effort involved in breastfeeding. The vouchers were frequently described as a reward, a bonus and something to look forward to, and helping women keep going with their breastfeeding. They were often perceived as compensation for the difficulties women encountered during breastfeeding. The scheme was not thought to make a difference to mothers who were strongly against breastfeeding. However, women did believe the scheme would help normalise breastfeeding, influence those who were undecided and help women to keep going with breastfeeding and reach key milestones e.g. 6 weeks or 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The scheme was acceptable to women, who perceived it as rewarding and valuing them for breastfeeding. Women reported that the scheme could raise awareness of breastfeeding and encourage its normalisation. This provides a possible mechanism of action to explain the results of the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number 44898617 , https://www.isrctn.com.

Prevalence of homeopathy use by the general population worldwide: a systematic review.

AIM: To systematically review surveys of 12-month prevalence of homeopathy use by the general population worldwide. METHODS: Studies were identified via database searches to October 2015. Study quality was assessed using a six-item tool. All estimates were in the context of a survey which also reported prevalence of any complementary and alternative medicine use. RESULTS: A total of 36 surveys were included. Of these, 67% met four of six quality criteria. Twelve-month prevalence of treatment by a homeopath was reported in 24 surveys of adults (median 1.5%, range 0.2-8.2%). Estimates for children were similar to those for adults. Rates in the USA, UK, Australia and Canada all ranged from 0.2% to 2.9% and remained stable over the years surveyed (1986-2012). Twelve-month prevalence of all use of homeopathy (purchase of over-the-counter homeopathic medicines and treatment by a homeopath) was reported in 10 surveys of adults (median 3.9%, range 0.7-9.8%) while a further 11 surveys which did not define the type of homeopathy use reported similar data. Rates in the USA and Australia ranged from 1.7% to 4.4% and remained stable over the years surveyed. The highest use was reported by a survey in Switzerland where homeopathy is covered by mandatory health insurance. CONCLUSIONS: This review summarises 12-month prevalence of homeopathy use from surveys conducted in eleven countries (USA, UK, Australia, Israel, Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Germany, South Korea, Japan and Singapore). Each year a small but significant percentage of these general populations use homeopathy. This includes visits to homeopaths as well as purchase of over-the-counter homeopathic medicines.

Brief Report: Staged-informed Consent in the Cohort Multiple Randomized Controlled Trial Design.

The "cohort multiple randomized controlled trial," a new design for pragmatic trials, embeds multiple trials within a cohort. The cohort multiple RCT is an attractive alternative to conventional RCTs in fields where recruitment is slow, multiple new (competing) interventions for the same condition have to be tested, new interventions are highly preferred by patients and doctors, and the risk of disappointment bias, cross-over, and contamination is considerable. To prevent these unwanted effects, the cohort multiple RCT provides information on randomization to the intervention group/arm only, and only after randomization (i.e., prerandomization). To some, especially in a clinical setting, this is not ethically acceptable. In this article, we argue that prerandomization in the cohort multiple randomized controlled trial (cmRCT) can be avoided by adopting a staged-informed consent procedure. In the first stage, at entry into the cohort, all potential participants are asked for their informed consent to participate in a cohort study and broad consent to be either randomly selected to be approached for experimental interventions or to serve as control without further notice during participation in the cohort. In a second stage, at the initiation of an RCT within the cohort, informed consent to receive the intervention is then only sought in those randomly selected for the intervention arm. At the third stage, after completion of each RCT, all cohort participants receive aggregate disclosure of trial results. This staged-informed consent procedure avoids prerandomization in cmRCT and aims to keep participants actively engaged in the research process.

Patterns of multimorbidity and their association with health outcomes within Yorkshire, England: baseline results from the Yorkshire Health Study.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is increasingly being recognized as a serious public health concern. Research into its determinants, prevalence, and management is needed and as the risk of experiencing multiple chronic conditions increases over time, attention should be given to investigating the development of multimorbidity through prospective cohort design studies. Here we examine the baseline patterns of multimorbidity and their association with health outcomes for residents in Yorkshire, England using data from the Yorkshire Health Study. METHODS: Baseline data from the Yorkshire Health Study (YHS) was collected from 27,806 patients recruited between 2010 and 2012. A two-stage sampling strategy was implemented which first involved recruiting 43 general practice surgeries and then having them consent to mailing invitations to their patients to complete postal or online questionnaires. The questionnaire collected information on chronic health conditions, demographics, health-related behaviours, healthcare and medication usage, and a range of other health related variables. Descriptive statistics (chi-square and t tests) were used to examine associations between these variables and multimorbidity. RESULTS: In the YHS cohort, 10,332 participants (37.2 %) reported having at least two or more long-term health conditions (multimorbidity). Older age, BMI and deprivation were all positively associated with multimorbidity. Nearly half (45.7 %) of participants from the most deprived areas experienced multimorbidity. Based on the weighted sample, average health-related quality of life decreased with the number of health conditions reported; the mean EQ-5D score for participants with no conditions was 0.945 compared to 0.355 for participants with five or more. The mean number of medications used for those without multimorbidity was 1.81 (range 1-13, SD = 1.25) compared to 3.81 (range 1-14, SD = 2.44) for those with at least two long-term conditions and 7.47 (range 1-37, SD = 7.47) for those with 5+ conditions. CONCLUSION: Patterns of multimorbidity within the Yorkshire Health Study support research on multimorbidity within previous observational cross-sectional studies. The YHS provides both a facility for participant recruitment to intervention trials, and a large population-based longitudinal cohort for observational research. It is planned to continue to record chronic conditions and other health related behaviours in future waves which will be useful for examining determinants and trends in chronic disease and multimorbidity.

A comparative consecutive case series of 20 children with a diagnosis of ADHD receiving homeopathic treatment, compared with 10 children receiving usual care.

20 consecutively enrolled children age 5-16 with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) received treatment by a homeopath (8 consultations and individualized remedies) for one year. Ten subsequently enrolled children received similar time and attention for 4 months. The study explored optimum treatment protocols; the effectiveness, deliverability and acceptability of treatment; and the feasibility of outcome measurement and recruitment. Parents completed Conners' Parent Rating Scale, Revised Long Version ( CPRS-R: L) every 4 months, from which DSMIV total scores were extracted; and Measure Your Own Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP) every consultation. An interaction between time (baseline/4 months) and group (treatment/non-treatment) was found .756 F (1,28)=9.06, p=0.005. The intervention was associated with statistically significant improvements in treated children over the year: CPRS-R: L (t (18)=4.529, p≤0.000); MYMOP (t (18)=6.938, p≤0.000). Mean DSMIV total t scores decreased at each time point: baseline: 85 (SD 5.1); 4 months 76.2 (SD 10.9); and 12 months 71.5 (SD 12.77). Recruitment of control participants was problematic. Recruitment to treatment was feasible via ADHD support groups, charities, police support agencies and social services, not schools or NHS services. Attending appointments was problematic for some participants, but home visits did not improve uptake. The best venue was a familiar clinic. Some participants took medicines inappropriately, but generally taking homeopathic remedies was acceptable and well implemented. CPRS-R: L (80 items) was problematic for some parents. MYMOP was preferred by parents but not acceptable to stakeholders. In this small consecutive sample the intervention was associated with improvements in criminality, anger and children with a concomitant diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder ASD. Treatment by a homeopath was associated with sustained, increasing improvements and the intervention was acceptable to participants. More methodically rigorous research is warranted. "We recommend that future research in this area uses comparative effectiveness randomised controlled trial designs. We also recommend that these trials measure outcomes of relevance to stakeholder needs - the people and services who care for those with ADHD - parents, teachers and social workers and the criminal justice system".

Comparing alternative design options for chronic disease prevention interventions.

BACKGROUND: While the randomized clinical trial is considered to provide the highest level of evidence in clinical medicine, its superiority to other study designs in the context of prevention studies is debated. The purpose of this review was (i) to gather evidence about challenges facing both randomized controlled trials and observational designs for the conduct of population-based chronic disease prevention interventions and (ii) to consider the suitability of recently proposed hybrid designs for population-based prevention intervention studies. METHODS: Rapid review methods were employed for this study. Articles published within 2007-2012, were included if they: (i) discussed challenges or benefits related to any intervention study design, (ii) compared randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational designs or (iii) introduced a new study design potentially applicable to population-based interventions. After initial screening, papers retained for inclusion were subjected to content analysis and synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 35 included articles were reviewed and used for synthesis. Both RCTs and observational studies are subject to multiple challenges, the main being external and internal validity for RCTs and observational designs, respectively. Four new hybrid designs identified. CONCLUSION: Although any high quality design can produce high level of evidence, multiple challenges with prevention intervention RCTs or observational studies identified. New hybrid designs that carry benefits of randomized and observational methods may be the road ahead for to assess the effects of population-based interventions.

Improving recruitment of older people to clinical trials: use of the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial design.

There is widespread evidence of under-recruitment of older people to research studies, notably randomised controlled trials of interventions. Study exclusion criteria, ethical dilemmas, patient preference, risk of bias and challenges for treatment comparisons are particular problems faced by researchers. This article describes how more widespread use of the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) design in ageing research may help address many of these problems. The original key features of the cmRCT design are a large observational cohort of people with the condition of interest (e.g. frailty) with regular measurement of outcomes for the whole cohort. For each RCT eligible patients are identified and a random selection offered the trial intervention; their outcomes are compared with those eligible patients not offered the intervention. Relevant assents are obtained at baseline to enable future involvement in a range of potential trials. Where possible, the follow-up schedule is aligned with the key time points for assessment in future trials and includes the key baseline descriptors, and primary and secondary outcomes. The cmRCT approach also enables detailed observational and qualitative research for the chosen condition of interest, and might include the establishment of research biobanks to better align basic science, epidemiological, qualitative and clinical trial research.

Encouraging breastfeeding: financial incentives.

The NOSH (Nourishing Start for Health) three-phase research study is testing whether offering financial incentives for breastfeeding improves six-eight-week breastfeeding rates in low-rate areas. This article describes phase one development work, which aimed to explore views about practical aspects of the design of the scheme. Interviews and focus groups were held with women (n = 38) and healthcare providers (n = 53). Overall both preferred shopping vouchers over cash payments, with a total amount of £200-250 being considered a reasonable amount. There was concern that seeking proof of breastfeeding might impact negatively on women and the relationship with their healthcare providers. The most acceptable method to all was that women sign a statement that their baby was receiving breast milk: this was co-signed by a healthcare professional to confirm that they had discussed breastfeeding. These findings have informed the design of the financial incentive scheme being tested in the feasibility phase of the NOSH study.

Examining the incremental impact of long-standing health conditions on subjective well-being alongside the EQ-5D.

BACKGROUND: Generic preference-based measures such as the EQ-5D and SF-6D have been criticised for being narrowly focused on a sub-set of dimensions of health. Our study aims to explore whether long-standing health conditions have an incremental impact on subjective well-being alongside the EQ-5D. METHODS: Using data from the South Yorkshire Cohort study (N = 13,591) collected between 2010 and 2012 on the EQ-5D, long-standing health conditions (self-reported), and subjective well-being measure--life satisfaction using a response scale from 0 (completely dissatisfied) to 10 (completely satisfied), we employed generalised logit regression models. We assessed the impact of EQ-5D and long-standing health conditions together on life satisfaction by examining the size and significance of their estimated odds ratios. RESULTS: The EQ-5D had a significant association with life satisfaction, in which anxiety/depression and then self-care had the largest weights. Some long-standing health conditions were significant in some models, but most did not have an independent impact on life satisfaction. Overall, none of the health conditions had a consistent impact on life satisfaction alongside the EQ-5D. CONCLUSIONS: Out study suggests that the impact of long-standing health conditions on life satisfaction is adequately captured by the EQ-5D, although the findings are limited by reliance on self-reported conditions and a single item life satisfaction measure.

Healthcare providers' views on the acceptability of financial incentives for breastfeeding: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite a gradual increase in breastfeeding rates, overall in the UK there are wide variations, with a trend towards breastfeeding rates at 6-8 weeks remaining below 40% in less affluent areas. While financial incentives have been used with varying success to encourage positive health related behaviour change, there is little research on their use in encouraging breastfeeding. In this paper, we report on healthcare providers' views around whether using financial incentives in areas with low breastfeeding rates would be acceptable in principle. This research was part of a larger project looking at the development and feasibility testing of a financial incentive scheme for breastfeeding in preparation for a cluster randomised controlled trial. METHODS: Fifty-three healthcare providers were interviewed about their views on financial incentives for breastfeeding. Participants were purposively sampled to include a wide range of experience and roles associated with supporting mothers with infant feeding. Semi-structured individual and group interviews were conducted. Data were analysed thematically drawing on the principles of Framework Analysis. RESULTS: The key theme emerging from healthcare providers' views on the acceptability of financial incentives for breastfeeding was their possible impact on 'facilitating or impeding relationships'. Within this theme several additional aspects were discussed: the mother's relationship with her healthcare provider and services, with her baby and her family, and with the wider community. In addition, a key priority for healthcare providers was that an incentive scheme should not impact negatively on their professional integrity and responsibility towards women. CONCLUSION: Healthcare providers believe that financial incentives could have both positive and negative impacts on a mother's relationship with her family, baby and healthcare provider. When designing a financial incentive scheme we must take care to minimise the potential negative impacts that have been highlighted, while at the same time recognising the potential positive impacts for women in areas where breastfeeding rates are low.

Deprivation, clubs and drugs: results of a UK regional population-based cross-sectional study of weight management strategies.

BACKGROUND: Despite rising levels of obesity in England, little is known about slimming club and weight loss drug (medication) use or users. In order to inform future commissioning, we report the prevalence of various weight management strategies and examine the associations between slimming club and medication use and age, gender, deprivation and body mass index. METHODS: A population based cross-sectional survey of 26,113 adults was conducted in South Yorkshire using a self-completed health questionnaire. Participants were asked whether they had ever used the following interventions to manage their weight: increasing exercise, healthy eating, controlling portion size, slimming club, over the counter weight loss medication, or meal replacements. Factors associated with slimming club and weight-loss medication use were explored using logistic regression. RESULTS: Over half of the sample was either overweight (36.6%) or obese (19.6%). Obesity was more common in the most deprived areas compared to the least deprived (26.3% vs. 12.0%). Healthy eating (49.0%), controlling portion size (43.4%), and increasing exercise (43.0%) were the most commonly reported weight management strategies. Less common strategies were attending a slimming club (17.2%), meal replacements (3.4%) and weight-loss medication (3.2%). Adjusting for BMI, age, deprivation and long standing health conditions, women were significantly more likely to report ever using a slimming club (adjusted OR = 18.63, 95% CI = 16.52-21.00) and more likely to report ever using over the counter weight-loss medications (AOR = 3.73, 95% CI = 3.10-4.48), while respondents from the most deprived areas were less likely to report using slimming clubs (AOR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.53-0.68), and more likely to reporting using weight loss medications (AOR =1.38, 95% CI = 1.05-1.82). CONCLUSION: A large proportion of individuals report having used weight management strategies. Slimming clubs and over-the-counter weight loss medication account for a smaller proportion of the overall uptake. Those from less deprived areas were more likely to use slimming clubs while those from more deprived areas were more likely to use weight-loss medications. Future NHS and Local Authority commissioning of weight management services must be aware of this varying social gradient in weight management strategies.

Depression treated by homeopaths: a study protocol for a pragmatic cohort multiple randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The most commonly recommended treatments for depression are psychological/psychotherapeutic treatments, and antidepressant drugs. However, 38 percent of patients with depression do not use these recommended treatments. Some patients seek homeopathic treatment for depression, but insufficient evidence exists to conclude as to the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of treatment by homeopaths for patients with depression. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the acceptability and comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness of the offer of adjunctive treatment provided by homeopaths for patients with self-reported depression. METHOD: This pragmatic randomised controlled trial is embedded within the population based South Yorkshire Cohort (SYC) of whom nine percent self-report long-term depression. The SYC is designed to facilitate 'cohort multiple' randomised controlled trials (cmRCT). A self-completed questionnaire will be used to both screen and collect baseline data from potential trial participants. The primary outcome is PHQ-9. One-hundred-and-sixty-two participants will be randomly selected to the intervention group (Offer of treatment by a homeopath). The results of the Offer and the No Offer groups will be compared at 6 and 12 months using both an intention to treat (ITT) and complier average causal effect (CACE) analysis. Cost-effectiveness analysis will involve calculation of quality adjusted life year (QALY). In order to help interpret the quantitative findings a selection of up to 30 patients in the offer group will be invited to participate in qualitative interviews after the first consultation and after a minimum of 6 months. Interviews will be assessed by two researchers and results will be analysed using thematic analysis. Triangulation will be used to combine results from qualitative and quantitative methodologies at the interpretation stage, to see if results agree, offer complementary information on the same issue or contradict each other.

Interim results of a randomised controlled trial of homeopathic treatment for irritable bowel syndrome.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic condition for which there is no consensus on the optimum treatment. Gastroenterology problems are some of the most common conditions treated by homeopaths, yet few trials have explored the effectiveness of individualised homeopathic treatment for IBS. A three-armed trial was conducted which compared: usual care, homeopathic treatment plus usual care and supportive listening plus usual care. The primary outcome was change in irritable bowel symptom severity score between baseline and 26 weeks, calculated using ANCOVA. An interim ANCOVA adjusted for baseline IBS severity, age and employment status found no statistically significant difference between the three arms. However, a post-hoc test comparing homeopathic treatment plus usual care to usual care alone found a statistically significant difference in favour of homeopathic treatment. In addition, 62.5 percent of patients in the homeopathic treatment arm (compared to 25.0 percent of those in the usual care arm), achieved a clinically relevant change in irritable bowel symptom severity score, which indicates a promising effect for homeopathic treatment, though these results should be interpreted with caution due to the low number of participants in the study.

Development of a conceptual framework for defining trial efficiency.

BACKGROUND: Globally, there is a growing focus on efficient trials, yet numerous interpretations have emerged, suggesting a significant heterogeneity in understanding "efficiency" within the trial context. Therefore in this study, we aimed to dissect the multifaceted nature of trial efficiency by establishing a comprehensive conceptual framework for its definition. OBJECTIVES: To collate diverse perspectives regarding trial efficiency and to achieve consensus on a conceptual framework for defining trial efficiency. METHODS: From July 2022 to July 2023, we undertook a literature review to identify various terms that have been used to define trial efficiency. We then conducted a modified e-Delphi study, comprising an exploratory open round and a subsequent scoring round to refine and validate the identified items. We recruited a wide range of experts in the global trial community including trialists, funders, sponsors, journal editors and members of the public. Consensus was defined as items rated "without disagreement", measured by the inter-percentile range adjusted for symmetry through the UCLA/RAND approach. RESULTS: Seventy-eight studies were identified from a literature review, from which we extracted nine terms related to trial efficiency. We then used review findings as exemplars in the Delphi open round. Forty-nine international experts were recruited to the e-Delphi panel. Open round responses resulted in the refinement of the initial nine terms, which were consequently included in the scoring round. We obtained consensus on all nine items: 1) four constructs that collectively define trial efficiency containing scientific efficiency, operational efficiency, statistical efficiency and economic efficiency; and 2) five essential building blocks for efficient trial comprising trial design, trial process, infrastructure, superstructure, and stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first attempt to dissect the concept of trial efficiency into theoretical constructs. Having an agreed definition will allow better trial implementation and facilitate effective communication and decision-making across stakeholders. We also identified essential building blocks that are the cornerstones of an efficient trial. In this pursuit of understanding, we are not only unravelling the complexities of trial efficiency but also laying the groundwork for evaluating the efficiency of an individual trial or a trial system in the future.

Characteristics, consent patterns, and challenges of randomized trials using the Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) design - A scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) is a pragmatic design approach that may overcome frequent challenges of traditional randomized trials such as slow recruitment, burdensome consent procedures, or limited external validity. This scoping review aims to identify all randomized controlled trials using the TwiCs design and to summarize their design characteristics, ways to obtain informed consent, output, reported challenges and mitigation strategies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane, trial registries and citation tracking up to December 2022. TwiCs were defined as randomized trials embedded in a cohort with postrandomization consent for the intervention group and no specific postrandomization consent for the usual care control group. Information from identified TwiCs was extracted in duplicate from protocols, publications, and registry entries. We analyzed the information descriptively and qualitatively to highlight methodological challenges and solutions related to nonuptake of interventions and informed consent procedure. RESULTS: We identified a total of 46 TwiCs conducted between 2005 and 2022 in 14 different countries by a handful of research groups. The most common medical fields were oncology (11/46; 24%), infectious diseases (8/46; 17%), and mental health (7/46; 15%). A typical TwiCs was investigator-initiated (46/46; 100%), publicly funded (36/46; 78%), and recruited outpatients (27/46; 59%). Excluding eight pilot trials, only 16/38 (42%) TwiCs adjusted their calculated sample size for nonuptake of the intervention, anticipating a median nonuptake of 25% (interquartile range 10%-32%) in the experimental arm. Seventeen TwiCs (45%) planned analyses to adjust effect estimates for nonuptake. Regarding informed consent, we observed three patterns: 1) three separate consents for cohort participation, randomization, and intervention (17/46; 37%); 2) combined consent for cohort participation and randomization and a separate intervention consent (10/46; 22%); and 3) consent only for cohort participation and intervention (randomization consent not mentioned; 19/46; 41%). CONCLUSION: Existing TwiCs are globally scattered across a few research groups covering a wide range of medical fields and interventions. Despite the potential advantages, the number of TwiCs remains small. The variability in consent procedures and the possibility of substantial nonuptake of the intervention warrants further research to guide the planning, implementation, and analysis of TwiCs.

Randomised trials conducted using cohorts: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Cohort studies generate and collect longitudinal data for a variety of research purposes. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) increasingly use cohort studies as data infrastructures to help identify and recruit trial participants and assess outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent, range and nature of research using cohorts for RCTs and describe the varied definitions and conceptual boundaries for RCTs using cohorts. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Searches were undertaken in January 2021 in MEDLINE (Ovid) and EBM Reviews-Cochrane Methodology Registry (Final issue, third Quarter 2012). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Reports published between January 2007 and December 2021 of (a) cohorts used or planned to be used, to conduct RCTs, or (b) RCTs which use cohorts to recruit participants and/or collect trial outcomes, or (c) methodological studies discussing the use of cohorts for RCTs. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted on the condition being studied, age group, setting, country/continent, intervention(s) and comparators planned or received, unit of randomisation, timing of randomisation, approach to informed consent, study design and terminology. RESULTS: A total of 175 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. We identified 61 protocols, 9 descriptions of stand-alone cohorts intended to be used for future RCTs, 39 RCTs using cohorts and 34 methodological papers.The use and scope of this approach is growing. The thematics of study are far-ranging, including population health, oncology, mental and behavioural disorders, and musculoskeletal conditions.Authors reported that this approach can lead to more efficient recruitment, more representative samples, and lessen disappointment bias and crossovers. CONCLUSION: This review outlines the development of cohorts to conduct RCTs including the range of use and innovative changes and adaptations. Inconsistencies in the use of terminology and concepts are highlighted. Guidance now needs to be developed to support the design and reporting of RCTs conducted using cohorts.