Early versus delayed weight-bearing following operatively treated ankle fracture (WAX): a non-inferiority, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: After surgery for a broken ankle, patients are usually instructed to avoid walking for 6 weeks (delayed weight-bearing). Walking 2 weeks after surgery (early weight-bearing) might be a safe and preferable rehabilitation strategy. This study aimed to determine the clinical and cost effectiveness of an early weight-bearing strategy compared with a delayed weight-bearing strategy. METHODS: This was a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial including 561 participants (aged ≥18 years) who received acute surgery for an unstable ankle fracture in 23 UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals who were assigned to either a delayed weight-bearing (n=280) or an early weight-bearing rehabilitation strategy (n=281). Patients treated with a hindfoot nail, those who did not have protective ankle sensation (eg, peripheral neuropathy), did not have the capacity to consent, or did not have the ability to adhere to trial procedures were excluded. Neither participants nor clinicians were masked to the treatment. The primary outcome was ankle function measured using the Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) at 4 months after randomisation, in the per-protocol population. The pre-specified non-inferiority OMAS margin was -6 points and superiority testing was included in the intention-to-treat population in the event of non-inferiority. The trial was prospectively registered with ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN12883981, and the trial is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Primary outcome data were collected from 480 (86%) of 561 participants. Recruitment was conducted between Jan 13, 2020, and Oct 29, 2021. At 4 months after randomisation, the mean OMAS score was 65·9 in the early weight-bearing and 61·2 in the delayed weight-bearing group and adjusted mean difference was 4·47 (95% CI 0·58 to 8·37, p=0·024; superiority testing adjusted difference 4·42, 95% CI 0·53 to 8·32, p=0·026) in favour of early weight-bearing. 46 (16%) participants in the early weight-bearing group and 39 (14%) in the delayed weight-bearing group had one or more complications (adjusted odds ratio 1·18, 95% CI 0·80 to 1·75, p=0·40). The mean costs from the perspective of the NHS and personal social services in the early and delayed weight-bearing groups were £725 and £785, respectively (mean difference -£60 [95% CI -342 to 232]). The probability that early weight-bearing is cost-effective exceeded 80%. INTERPRETATION: An early weight-bearing strategy was found to be clinically non-inferior and highly likely to be cost-effective compared with the current standard of care (delayed weight-bearing). FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre, and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley.

Correction: Seasonal influenza: Modelling approaches to capture immunity propagation.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007096.].

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy for insomnia in primary care (HABIT): a pragmatic, superiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Insomnia is prevalent and distressing but access to the first-line treatment, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), is extremely limited. We aimed to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of sleep restriction therapy, a key component of CBT, which has the potential to be widely implemented. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, superiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial of sleep restriction therapy versus sleep hygiene. Adults with insomnia disorder were recruited from 35 general practices across England and randomly assigned (1:1) using a web-based randomisation programme to either four sessions of nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy plus a sleep hygiene booklet or a sleep hygiene booklet only. There was no restriction on usual care for either group. Outcomes were assessed at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. The primary endpoint was self-reported insomnia severity at 6 months measured with the insomnia severity index (ISI). The primary analysis included participants according to their allocated group and who contributed at least one outcome measurement. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from the UK National Health Service and personal social services perspective and expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The trial was prospectively registered (ISRCTN42499563). FINDINGS: Between Aug 29, 2018, and March 23, 2020 we randomly assigned 642 participants to sleep restriction therapy (n=321) or sleep hygiene (n=321). Mean age was 55·4 years (range 19-88), with 489 (76·2%) participants being female and 153 (23·8%) being male. 580 (90·3%) participants provided data for at least one outcome measurement. At 6 months, mean ISI score was 10·9 (SD 5·5) for sleep restriction therapy and 13·9 (5·2) for sleep hygiene (adjusted mean difference -3·05, 95% CI -3·83 to -2·28; p<0·0001; Cohen's d -0·74), indicating that participants in the sleep restriction therapy group reported lower insomnia severity than the sleep hygiene group. The incremental cost per QALY gained was £2076, giving a 95·3% probability that treatment was cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000. Eight participants in each group had serious adverse events, none of which were judged to be related to intervention. INTERPRETATION: Brief nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy in primary care reduces insomnia symptoms, is likely to be cost-effective, and has the potential to be widely implemented as a first-line treatment for insomnia disorder. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Molnupiravir plus usual care versus usual care alone as early treatment for adults with COVID-19 at increased risk of adverse outcomes (PANORAMIC): an open-label, platform-adaptive randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of molnupiravir, an oral antiviral medication for SARS-CoV-2, has not been established in vaccinated patients in the community at increased risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. We aimed to establish whether the addition of molnupiravir to usual care reduced hospital admissions and deaths associated with COVID-19 in this population. METHODS: PANORAMIC was a UK-based, national, multicentre, open-label, multigroup, prospective, platform adaptive randomised controlled trial. Eligible participants were aged 50 years or older-or aged 18 years or older with relevant comorbidities-and had been unwell with confirmed COVID-19 for 5 days or fewer in the community. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 800 mg molnupiravir twice daily for 5 days plus usual care or usual care only. A secure, web-based system (Spinnaker) was used for randomisation, which was stratified by age (<50 years vs ≥50 years) and vaccination status (yes vs no). COVID-19 outcomes were tracked via a self-completed online daily diary for 28 days after randomisation. The primary outcome was all-cause hospitalisation or death within 28 days of randomisation, which was analysed using Bayesian models in all eligible participants who were randomly assigned. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 30448031. FINDINGS: Between Dec 8, 2021, and April 27, 2022, 26 411 participants were randomly assigned, 12 821 to molnupiravir plus usual care, 12 962 to usual care alone, and 628 to other treatment groups (which will be reported separately). 12 529 participants from the molnupiravir plus usual care group, and 12 525 from the usual care group were included in the primary analysis population. The mean age of the population was 56·6 years (SD 12·6), and 24 290 (94%) of 25 708 participants had had at least three doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Hospitalisations or deaths were recorded in 105 (1%) of 12 529 participants in the molnupiravir plus usual care group versus 98 (1%) of 12 525 in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio 1·06 [95% Bayesian credible interval 0·81-1·41]; probability of superiority 0·33). There was no evidence of treatment interaction between subgroups. Serious adverse events were recorded for 50 (0·4%) of 12 774 participants in the molnupiravir plus usual care group and for 45 (0·3%) of 12 934 in the usual care group. None of these events were judged to be related to molnupiravir. INTERPRETATION: Molnupiravir did not reduce the frequency of COVID-19-associated hospitalisations or death among high-risk vaccinated adults in the community. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards for Interventions That Use Artificial Intelligence (CHEERS-AI).

OBJECTIVES: Economic evaluations (EEs) are commonly used by decision makers to understand the value of health interventions. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS 2022) provide reporting guidelines for EEs. Healthcare systems will increasingly see new interventions that use artificial intelligence (AI) to perform their function. We developed Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards for Interventions that use AI (CHEERS-AI) to ensure EEs of AI-based health interventions are reported in a transparent and reproducible manner. METHODS: Potential CHEERS-AI reporting items were informed by 2 published systematic literature reviews of EEs and a contemporary update. A Delphi study was conducted using 3 survey rounds to elicit multidisciplinary expert views on 26 potential items, through a 9-point Likert rating scale and qualitative comments. An online consensus meeting was held to finalize outstanding reporting items. A digital health patient group reviewed the final checklist from a patient perspective. RESULTS: A total of 58 participants responded to survey round 1, 42, and 31 of whom responded to rounds 2 and 3, respectively. Nine participants joined the consensus meeting. Ultimately, 38 reporting items were included in CHEERS-AI. They comprised the 28 original CHEERS 2022 items, plus 10 new AI-specific reporting items. Additionally, 8 of the original CHEERS 2022 items were elaborated on to ensure AI-specific nuance is reported. CONCLUSIONS: CHEERS-AI should be used when reporting an EE of an intervention that uses AI to perform its function. CHEERS-AI will help decision makers and reviewers to understand important AI-specific details of an intervention, and any implications for the EE methods used and cost-effectiveness conclusions.

Longitudinal associations between socioeconomic position and overall health of children with chronic kidney disease and their carers.

BACKGROUND: Disadvantaged socioeconomic position (SEP) is an important predictor of poor health in children with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The time course over which SEP influences the health of children with CKD and their carers is unknown. METHODS: This prospective longitudinal study included 377 children, aged 6-18 years with CKD (stages I-V, dialysis, and transplant), and their primary carers. Mixed effects ordinal regression was performed to assess the association between SEP and carer-rated child health and carer self-rated health over a 4-year follow-up. RESULTS: Adjusted for CKD stage, higher family household income (adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) 3.3, 1.8-6.0), employed status of primary carers (1.7, 0.9-3.0), higher carer-perceived financial status (2.6, 1.4-4.8), and carer home ownership (2.2, 1.2-4.0) were associated with better carer-rated child health. Household income also had a differential effect on the carer's self-rated health over time (p = 0.005). The predicted probabilities for carers' overall health being 'very good' among lower income groups at 0, 2, and 4 years were 0.43 (0.28-0.60), 0.34 (0.20-0.51), and 0.25 (0.12-0.44), respectively, and 0.81 (0.69-0.88), 0.84 (0.74-0.91), and 0.88 (0.76-0.94) for carers within the higher income group. CONCLUSIONS: Carers and their children with CKD in higher SEP report better overall child and carer health compared with those in lower SEP. Carers of children with CKD in low-income households had poorer self-rated health compared with carers in higher-income households at baseline, and this worsened over time. These cumulative effects may contribute to health inequities between higher and lower SEP groups over time. Graphical abstract A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Variation in follow-up for children born very preterm in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Children born very preterm (<32 weeks of gestation) face high risks of neurodevelopmental and health difficulties compared with children born at term. Follow-up after discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit is essential to ensure early detection and intervention, but data on policy approaches are sparse. METHODS: We investigated the characteristics of follow-up policy and programmes in 11 European countries from 2011 to 2022 using healthcare informant questionnaires and the published/grey literature. We further explored how one aspect of follow-up, its recommended duration, may be reflected in the percent of parents reporting that their children are receiving follow-up services at 5 years of age in these countries using data from an area-based cohort of very preterm births in 2011/12 (N = 3635). RESULTS: Between 2011/12 and 22, the number of countries with follow-up policies or programmes increased from 6 to 11. The policies and programmes were heterogeneous in eligibility criteria, duration and content. In countries that recommended longer follow-up, parent-reported follow-up rates at 5 years of age were higher, especially among the highest risk children, born <28 weeks' gestation or with birthweight <1000 g: between 42.1% and 70.1%, vs. <20% in most countries without recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Large variations exist in follow-up policies and programmes for children born very preterm in Europe; differences in recommended duration translate into cross-country disparities in reported follow-up at 5 years of age.

Longitudinal assessment of the health-related quality of life of children and adolescents with chronic kidney disease.

In this multi-center longitudinal cohort study conducted in Australia and New Zealand, we assessed the trajectories of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) over time. A total of 377 children (aged 6-18 years) with CKD stages 1-5 (pre-dialysis), dialysis, or transplant, were followed biennially for four years. Multi Attribute Utility (MAU) scores of HRQoL were measured at baseline and at two and four years using the McMaster Health Utilities Index Mark 3 tool, a generic multi-attribute, preference-based system. A multivariable linear mixed model was used to assess the trajectories of HRQoL over time in 199 children with CKD stage 1-5, 43 children receiving dialysis and 135 kidney transplant recipients. An interaction between CKD stage at baseline and follow-up time indicated that the slopes of the HRQoL scores differed between children by CKD stage at inception. Over half of the cohort on dialysis at baseline had received a kidney transplant by the end of year four and the MAU scores of these children increased by a meaningful amount averaging 0.05 (95% confidence interval 0.01 to 0.09) per year in comparison to those who were transplant recipients at baseline. The mean difference between baseline and year two MAU scores was 0.09 (95% confidence interval -0.05, 0.23), (Cohen's d effect size 0.31). Thus, improvement in HRQoL over time of children on dialysis at baseline was likely to have been driven by their transition from dialysis to transplantation. Additionally, children with CKD stage 1-5 and transplant recipients at baseline had no changes in their disease stage or treatment modality and experienced stable HRQoL over time.

Reliability, acceptability, validity and responsiveness of the CHU9D and PedsQL in the measurement of quality of life in children and adolescents with overweight and obesity.

BACKGROUND: The Paediatric Quality of life Inventory (PedsQLTM) Generic Core Scales and the Child Health Utilities 9 Dimensions (CHU9D) are two paediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures commonly used in overweight and obesity research. However, no studies have comprehensively established the psychometric properties of these instruments in the context of paediatric overweight and obesity. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability, acceptability, validity and responsiveness of the PedsQL and the CHU9D in the measurement of HRQoL among children and adolescents living with overweight and obesity. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Subjects were 6544 child participants of the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children, with up to 3 repeated measures of PedsQL and CHU9D and aged between 10 and 17 years. Weight and height were measured objectively by trained operators, and weight status determined using World Health Organisation growth standards. We examined reliability, acceptability, known group and convergent validity and responsiveness, using recognised methods. RESULTS: Both PedsQL and CHU9D demonstrated good internal consistency reliability, and high acceptability. Neither instrument showed strong convergent validity, but PedsQL appears to be superior to the CHU9D in known groups validity and responsiveness. Compared with healthy weight, mean (95%CI) differences in PedsQL scores for children with obesity were: boys -5.6 (-6.2, -4.4); girls -6.7 (-8.1, -5.4) and differences in CHU9D utility were: boys -0.02 (-0.034, -0.006); girls -0.035 (-0.054, -0.015). Differences in scores for overweight compared with healthy weight were: PedsQL boys -2.2 (-3.0, -1.4) and girls -1.3 (-2.0, -0.6) and CHU9D boys: no significant difference; girls -0.014 (-0.026, -0.003). CONCLUSION: PedsQL and CHU9D overall demonstrated good psychometric properties, supporting their use in measuring HRQoL in paediatric overweight and obesity. CHU9D had poorer responsiveness and did not discriminate between overweight and healthy weight in boys, which may limit its use in economic evaluation.

Economic costs, health-related quality of life outcomes and cost-utility of a physical and psychological group intervention targeted at older adults with neurogenic claudication.

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests that structured and progressive exercise underpinned by a cognitive behavioural approach can improve functional outcomes in patients with neurogenic claudication (NC). However, evidence surrounding its economic benefits is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the economic costs, health-related quality of life outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a physical and psychological group intervention (BOOST programme) versus best practice advice (BPA) in older adults with NC. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted based on data from a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial. The base-case economic evaluation took the form of an intention-to-treat analysis conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS) perspective and separately from a societal perspective. Costs (£ 2018-2019 prices) were collected prospectively over a 12 month follow-up period. A bivariate regression of costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with multiple imputation of missing data, was conducted to estimate the incremental cost per QALY gained and the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) of the BOOST programme in comparison to BPA. Sensitivity and pre-specified subgroup analyses explored uncertainty and heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness estimates. RESULTS: Participants (N = 435) were randomised to the BOOST programme (n = 292) or BPA (n = 143). Mean (standard error [SE]) NHS and PSS costs over 12 months were £1,974 (£118) in the BOOST arm versus £1,827 (£169) in the BPA arm (p = 0.474). Mean (SE) QALY estimates were 0.620 (0.009) versus 0.599 (0.006), respectively (p = 0.093). The probability that the BOOST programme is cost-effective ranged between 67 and 83% (NHS and PSS perspective) and 79-89% (societal perspective) at cost-effectiveness thresholds between £15,000 and £30,000 per QALY gained. INMBs ranged between £145 and £464 at similar cost-effectiveness thresholds. The cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The BOOST programme resulted in modest QALY gains over the 12 month follow-up period. Future studies with longer intervention and follow-up periods are needed to address uncertainty around the health-related quality of life impacts and cost-effectiveness of such programmes. Trial registration This study has been registered in the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, reference number ISRCTN12698674. Registered on 10 November 2015.

Health-related quality of life of children born very preterm: a multinational European cohort study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to (1) describe the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes experienced by children born very preterm (28-31 weeks' gestation) and extremely preterm (< 28 weeks' gestation) at five years of age and (2) explore the mediation effects of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and severe non-respiratory neonatal morbidity on those outcomes. METHODS: This investigation was based on data for 3687 children born at < 32 weeks' gestation that contributed to the EPICE and SHIPS studies conducted in 19 regions across 11 European countries. Descriptive statistics and multi-level ordinary linear squares (OLS) regression were used to explore the association between perinatal and sociodemographic characteristics and PedsQL™ GCS scores. A mediation analysis that applied generalised structural equation modelling explored the association between potential mediators and PedsQL™ GCS scores. RESULTS: The multi-level OLS regression (fully adjusted model) revealed that birth at < 26 weeks' gestation, BPD status and experience of severe non-respiratory morbidity were associated with mean decrements in the total PedsQL™ GCS score of 0.35, 3.71 and 5.87, respectively. The mediation analysis revealed that the indirect effects of BPD and severe non-respiratory morbidity on the total PedsQL™ GCS score translated into decrements of 1.73 and 17.56, respectively, at < 26 weeks' gestation; 0.99 and 10.95, respectively, at 26-27 weeks' gestation; and 0.34 and 4.80, respectively, at 28-29 weeks' gestation (referent: birth at 30-31 weeks' gestation). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that HRQoL is particularly impaired by extremely preterm birth and the concomitant complications of preterm birth such as BPD and severe non-respiratory morbidity.

Comparative evaluation of the health utilities index mark 3 and the short form 6D: evidence from an individual participant data meta-analysis of very preterm and very low birthweight adults.

BACKGROUND: The most appropriate preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments for trials or research studies that ascertain the consequences of individuals born very preterm and/or low birthweight (VP/VLBW) are not known. Agreement between the HUI3 and SF-6D multi-attribute utility measures have not been previously investigated for VP/VLBW and normal birthweight or term-born controls. This study examined the agreement between the outputs of the HUI3 and SF-6D measures among adults born VP/VLBW and normal birthweight or term born controls. METHODS: We used two prospective cohorts of individuals born VP/VLBW and controls contributing to the 'Research on European Children and Adults Born Preterm' (RECAP) consortium which assessed HRQoL using two preference-based measures. The combined dataset of individual participant data (IPD) included 407 adult VP/VLBW survivors and 367 controls, ranging in age from 18 to 26 years. Bland-Altman plots, intra-class correlation coefficients, and generalized linear mixed models in a one-step approach were used to examine agreement between the measures. RESULTS: There was significant discordance between the HUI3 and SF-6D multi-attribute utility measures in the VP/VLBW sample, controls, and in the combined samples. Agreement between the HUI3 and SF-6D multi-attribute utility measures was weaker in controls compared with VP/VLBW individuals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The HUI3 and SF-6D each provide unique information on different aspects of health status across the groups. The HUI3 better captures preterm-related changes to HRQoL in adulthood compared to SF-6D. Studies focused on measuring physical or cognitive aspects of health will likely benefit from using the HUI3 instead of the SF-6D, regardless of gestational age at birth and birthweight status.

Mapping and identifying service models for community-based services for children with intellectual disabilities and behaviours that challenge in England.

BACKGROUND: One in five children with an intellectual disability in the UK display behaviours that challenge. Despite associated impacts on the children themselves, their families, and services, little research has been published about how best to design, organise, and deliver health and care services to these children. The purpose of this study was to describe how services are structured and organised ("service models") in England for community-based health and care services for children with intellectual disability who display behaviours that challenge. METHODS: Survey data about services were collected from 161 eligible community-based services in England. Staff from 60 of these services were also interviewed. A combination of latent class and descriptive analysis, coupled with consultation with family carers and professionals was used to identify and describe groupings of similar services (i.e., "service models"). RESULTS: The latent class analysis, completed as a first step in the process, supported a distinction between specialist services and non-specialist services for children who display behaviours that challenge. Planned descriptive analyses incorporating additional study variables were undertaken to further refine the service models. Five service models were identified: Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) (n = 69 services), Intellectual Disability CAMHS (n = 28 services), Children and Young People Disability services (n = 25 services), Specialist services for children who display behaviours that challenge (n = 27 services), and broader age range services for children and/or adolescents and adults (n= 12 services). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis led to a typology of five service models for community health and care services for children with intellectual disabilities and behaviours that challenge in England. Identification of a typology of service models is a first step in building evidence about the best provision of services for children with intellectual disabilities who display behaviours that challenge. The methods used in the current study may be useful in research developing service typologies in other specialist fields of health and care. STUDY REGISTRATION: Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88920546, Date assigned 05/07/2022.

The current status of risk-stratified breast screening.

Apart from high-risk scenarios such as the presence of highly penetrant genetic mutations, breast screening typically comprises mammography or tomosynthesis strategies defined by age. However, age-based screening ignores the range of breast cancer risks that individual women may possess and is antithetical to the ambitions of personalised early detection. Whilst screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality, this is at the risk of potentially significant harms including overdiagnosis with overtreatment, and psychological morbidity associated with false positives. In risk-stratified screening, individualised risk assessment may inform screening intensity/interval, starting age, imaging modality used, or even decisions not to screen. However, clear evidence for its benefits and harms needs to be established. In this scoping review, the authors summarise the established and emerging evidence regarding several critical dependencies for successful risk-stratified breast screening: risk prediction model performance, epidemiological studies, retrospective clinical evaluations, health economic evaluations and qualitative research on feasibility and acceptability. Family history, breast density or reproductive factors are not on their own suitable for precisely estimating risk and risk prediction models increasingly incorporate combinations of demographic, clinical, genetic and imaging-related parameters. Clinical evaluations of risk-stratified screening are currently limited. Epidemiological evidence is sparse, and randomised trials only began in recent years.

Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss.

Miscarriage is generally defined as the loss of a pregnancy before viability. An estimated 23 million miscarriages occur every year worldwide, translating to 44 pregnancy losses each minute. The pooled risk of miscarriage is 15·3% (95% CI 12·5-18·7%) of all recognised pregnancies. The population prevalence of women who have had one miscarriage is 10·8% (10·3-11·4%), two miscarriages is 1·9% (1·8-2·1%), and three or more miscarriages is 0·7% (0·5-0·8%). Risk factors for miscarriage include very young or older female age (younger than 20 years and older than 35 years), older male age (older than 40 years), very low or very high body-mass index, Black ethnicity, previous miscarriages, smoking, alcohol, stress, working night shifts, air pollution, and exposure to pesticides. The consequences of miscarriage are both physical, such as bleeding or infection, and psychological. Psychological consequences include increases in the risk of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and suicide. Miscarriage, and especially recurrent miscarriage, is also a sentinel risk marker for obstetric complications, including preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, placental abruption, and stillbirth in future pregnancies, and a predictor of longer-term health problems, such as cardiovascular disease and venous thromboembolism. The costs of miscarriage affect individuals, health-care systems, and society. The short-term national economic cost of miscarriage is estimated to be £471 million per year in the UK. As recurrent miscarriage is a sentinel marker for various obstetric risks in future pregnancies, women should receive care in preconception and obstetric clinics specialising in patients at high risk. As psychological morbidity is common after pregnancy loss, effective screening instruments and treatment options for mental health consequences of miscarriage need to be available. We recommend that miscarriage data are gathered and reported to facilitate comparison of rates among countries, to accelerate research, and to improve patient care and policy development.

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations.

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, as well as the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as health care, public health, education, social care, etc). This summary article presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist and recommendations for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer reviewed journals as well as the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. However, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, as there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.

High Healthcare Use at Age 5 Years in a European Cohort of Children Born Very Preterm.

OBJECTIVES: To describe parent-reported healthcare service use at age 5 years in children born very preterm and investigate whether perinatal and social factors and the use of very preterm follow-up services are associated with high service use. STUDY DESIGN: We used data from an area-based cohort of births at <32 weeks of gestation from 11 European countries, collected from birth records and parental questionnaires at 5 years of age. Using the published literature, we defined high use of outpatient/inpatient care (≥4 sick visits to general practitioners, pediatricians, or nurses, ≥3 emergency room visits, or ≥1 overnight hospitalization) and specialist care (≥2 different specialists or ≥3 visits). We also categorized countries as having either a high or a low rate of children using very preterm follow-up services at age 5 years. RESULTS: Overall, 43% of children had high outpatient/inpatient care use and 48% had high specialist care use during the previous year. Perinatal factors were associated with high outpatient/inpatient and specialist care use, with a more significant association with specialist services. Associations with intermediate parental educational level and unemployment were stronger for outpatient/inpatient services. Living in a country with higher rates of very preterm follow-up service use was associated with lower use of outpatient/inpatient services. CONCLUSIONS: Children born very preterm had high healthcare service use at age 5 years, with different patterns for outpatient/inpatient and specialist care by perinatal and social factors. Longer follow-up of children born very preterm may improve care coordination and help avoid undesirable health service use.

Economic costs at age five associated with very preterm birth: multinational European cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to estimate the economic costs of care provided to children born very preterm and extremely preterm across 11 European countries, and to understand what perinatal and socioeconomic factors contribute to higher costs. METHODS: Generalised linear modelling was used to explore the association between perinatal and sociodemographic characteristics and total economic costs (€, 2016 prices) during the fifth year of life. RESULTS: Lower gestational age was associated with increased mean societal costs of €2755 (p < 0.001), €752 (p < 0.01) and €657 (p < 0.01) for children born at < 26, 26-27 and 28-29 weeks, respectively, in comparison to the reference group born at 30-31 weeks. A sensitivity analyses that excluded variables (BPD, any neonatal morbidity and presence of congenital anomaly) plausibly lying on the causal pathway between gestational age at birth and economic outcomes elevated incremental societal costs by €1482, €763 and €144 at < 26, 26-27 and 28-29 weeks, respectively, in comparison to the baseline model. CONCLUSION: This study provides new evidence about the main cost drivers associated with preterm birth in European countries. Evidence identified by this study can act as inputs within cost-effectiveness models for preventive or treatment interventions for preterm birth. IMPACT: What is the key message of your article? This study provides new evidence about the magnitude and drivers of economic costs associated with preterm birth in European countries. What does it add to the existing literature? Lower gestational age is associated with increased mean societal costs during mid-childhood with indirect costs representing a key driver of increased costs. What is the impact? For policy makers, this study adds to sparse evidence about the main cost drivers associated with preterm birth in European countries beyond the first 2 years of life.

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: A Report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force.

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces the previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, and the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as healthcare, public health, education, and social care). This Explanation and Elaboration Report presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist with recommendations and explanation and examples for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer-reviewed journals and the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. Nevertheless, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, given that there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) Statement: Updated Reporting Guidance for Health Economic Evaluations.

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, as well as the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as health care, public health, education, social care, etc). This summary article presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist and recommendations for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer reviewed journals as well as the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. However, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, as there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making.