Facilitators of, barriers to, and preferences for e-mental health interventions for depression and anxiety in men: Metasynthesis and recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about men's use of online mental health (eMH) interventions and factors that promote their engagement or attrition. We aimed to synthesise the qualitative literature on men's preferences for, attitudes towards, and experiences of using eMH interventions for depression and anxiety, and develop recommendations from the findings. METHOD: Systematic searches were conducted (Jan 2000-Oct 2020) in six databases; study quality was assessed using Qualsyst with a minimum total of 0.55 required for inclusion. Extracted data were synthesised using meta-aggregation. RESULTS: Eight studies met inclusion criteria and three synthesised findings were generated. (1) Facilitators of men's eMH use: finding apps and technology motivating and convenient, support and encouragement from important others, and interventions allowing men to take action, gain control over their mental health, and resulting in positive outcomes; (2) Barriers to men's eMH use: lack of free time, predicted or experienced lack of benefit from use, and technical difficulties; (3) What men want in eMH: personalised, tailored, relevant interventions that are bright and easy to use, with information presented in multiple formats, psychoeducation, exercises, self-monitoring, information on further resources, and the option of clinician involvement, without any repetitive questioning, boring tools, or negative feedback. LIMITATIONS: All included studies were conducted in high income, 'Western' countries; most data related to experiences of using an existing eMH intervention within a trial, rather than in 'real world' settings where eMH acceptability is generally lower and experiences may differ. CONCLUSIONS: Practice, research, and policy recommendations are presented.

Intersecting identities, diverse masculinities, and collaborative development: Considerations in creating online mental health interventions that work for men.

Online mental health interventions have received attention for their potential to bypass barriers that stop men from seeking mental health help from a health professional. However, emerging data suggest that men's use of online mental health interventions is low, and when used, early attrition is common. In this commentary, we hypothesise that men's common lack of engagement with online mental health interventions may reflect limited attention being paid to the needs and preferences of potential users during their development. We outline a series of considerations that we believe are important to advance the development of acceptable, effective online mental health interventions for men: (1) men's diverse and intersecting characteristics, circumstances, and needs; (2) centring positive, progressive masculinities; and (3) listening to, learning from, and working in partnership with men to develop interventions. We also examine how existing online mental health interventions targeting men have engaged with these considerations. Keywords: men, male, mental health, e-mental health, digital health, online interventions.

Anticipatory anxiety and participation in cancer screening. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To synthesize current evidence on the association between anticipatory anxiety, defined as apprehension-specific negative affect that may be experienced when exposed to potential threat or uncertainty, and cancer screening to better inform strategies to maximize participation rates. METHODS: Searches related to cancer screening and anxiety were conducted in seven electronic databases (APA PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL), with potentially eligible papers screened in Covidence. Data extraction was conducted independently by multiple authors. Barriers to cancer screening for any type of cancer and relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and intention were categorized and compared according to the form and target of anxiety and cancer types. RESULTS: A total of 74 articles (nparticipants  = 119,990) were included, reporting 103 relationships tested between anticipatory anxiety and cancer screening and 13 instances where anticipatory anxiety was reported as a barrier to screening. Anticipatory anxiety related to a possible cancer diagnosis was often associated with increased screening, while general anxiety showed no consistent relationship. Negative relationships were often found between anxiety about the screening procedure and cancer screening. CONCLUSION: Anticipatory anxiety about a cancer diagnosis may promote screening participation, whereas a fear of the screening procedure could be a barrier. Public health messaging and primary prevention practitioners should acknowledge the appropriate risk of cancer, while engendering screening confidence and highlighting the safety and comfort of screening tests.

Impact of different unconditional monetary incentives on survey response rates in men with prostate cancer: a 2-arm randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Men are often viewed as a difficult group to recruit for psychological research, including in psycho-oncology. Whilst research has demonstrated the effectiveness of small monetary incentives for encouraging research participation, little research has examined different large unconditional incentive amounts. Larger unconditional incentives may result in increased participation of men in psychological research. This randomised study within a case-control trial of men diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer aimed to investigate whether (a) response rates to a 30-min questionnaire completed via mail, online, or phone would vary with different unconditional incentive amounts, and (b) demographics would vary in those who responded within the different incentive groups. METHODS: We conducted this randomised study within a case-control cross-sectional study aiming to identify the social-ecological factors influencing treatment discontinuation in prostate cancer patients. A total of 238 participants from the cross-sectional study were randomised to receive one of two unconditional incentives (n = 121 received AUD$10, n = 117 received AUD$20) with the study materials (consent form and survey). RESULTS: Overall, 113 (47%) responded; n = 61/121 (50.4%) in the AUD$10 group, and n = 52/117 (44.4%) in the AUD$20 group. No evidence of a difference was found in response rates by incentive group (odds ratio 1.27, 95% CI = 0.76-2.12, p = 0.36). Additionally, there were no evident differences in the demographics of the responders vs. non-responders within each incentive group (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous research, we were unable to show that higher monetary incentives were more effective for increasing response rates. An AUD$20 unconditional incentive may be no more effective than a lesser amount for encouraging prostate cancer survivors to participate in research involving long questionnaires. Future research should consider the cost-benefits of providing large unconditional incentives, as non-responses will result in lost resources perhaps better utilised in other engagement strategies.

Social ecological influences on treatment decision-making in men diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals diagnosed with low risk, localised prostate cancer (PCa) face a difficult decision between active surveillance (AS) and definitive treatment. We aimed to explore perceived influences on treatment decision-making from the patient and partner's perspectives. METHODS: Patients (and partners) who met AS criteria and had chosen their treatment were recruited. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted via telephone to explore experiences of diagnosis, impact on patient lifestyle, experiences with physicians, treatment preferences/choice, treatment information understanding and needs, and overall decision-making process. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using Reflexive Thematic Analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-four male patients (18 chose AS) and 12 female partners participated. Five themes relating to social-ecological influences on treatment choice were identified: (1) partner support and direct influence on patient treatment choice, (2) patient and partner vicarious experiences may influence treatment decisions, (3) the influence of the patient's life circumstances, (4) disclosing to wider social networks: friends, family, and co-workers, and (5) the importance of a good relationship and experience with physicians. Additionally, two themes were identified relating to information patients and partners received about the treatment options during their decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: A range of individual and social influences on treatment decision-making were reported. Physicians providing treatment recommendations should consider and discuss the patient and partner's existing beliefs and treatment preferences and encourage shared decision-making. Further research on treatment decision-making of partnered and non-partnered PCa patients is required. We recommend research considers social ecological factors across the personal, interpersonal, community, and policy levels.

Why do men with prostate cancer discontinue active surveillance for definitive treatment? A mixed methods investigation.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the personal and/or medical reasons patients on active surveillance (AS) have, or consider having, further definitive treatment for their prostate cancer. Research suggests up to 50% of patients on AS will discontinue within 5 years, though reasons for discontinuation from the patient's perspective is under-explored. METHODS: Prostate cancer patients who were or had been on AS for at least 6 months were recruited. A questionnaire assessed reasons for receiving/considering definitive treatment and the extent to which reasons were personal or medical. Clinical information was extracted from a state-level population registry. A subset of participants were interviewed to further explore questionnaire responses. RESULTS: One-hundred and-three individuals completed the survey; 33 were also interviewed. Fifty-four survey participants (52%) had discontinued AS for definitive treatment. Common reasons for discontinuation were evidence of disease progression, doctor recommendation, desire to act, and fear of progression. Many participants who considered or had treatment reported weighing medical and personal factors equally in their decision. Interview participants described strongly considering any amount of disease progression and personal factors such as fear of progression, family concerns, and adverse vicarious experiences when deciding whether to pursue treatment. CONCLUSION: Both medical and personal factors are considered when deciding whether to discontinue AS. Identifying predictors of discontinuation is essential for informing supportive care services to improve AS management.

A systematic review of the unmet supportive care needs of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding the unmet supportive care needs of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer may enable researchers and health professionals to better support men and prevent discontinuation when there is no evidence of disease progression. This review aimed to identify the specific unmet supportive care needs of men on active surveillance. METHODS: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Databases (Pubmed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) were searched to identify qualitative and/or quantitative studies that reported unmet needs specific to men on active surveillance. Quality appraisals were conducted before results were narratively synthesised. RESULTS: Of the 3613 unique records identified, only eight articles were eligible (five qualitative and three cross-sectional studies). Unmet Informational, Emotional/Psychological, Social, and "Other" needs were identified. Only three studies had a primary aim of investigating unmet supportive care needs. Small active surveillance samples, use of nonvalidated measures, and minimal reporting of author reflexivity in qualitative studies were the main quality issues identified. CONCLUSIONS: The unmet needs of men on active surveillance is an underresearched area. Preliminary evidence suggests the information available and provided to men during active surveillance is perceived as inadequate and inconsistent. Men may also be experiencing unmet psychological/emotional, social, and other needs; however, further representative, high-quality research is required to understand the magnitude of this issue. Reporting results specific to treatment type and utilising relevant theories/models (such as the social ecological model [SEM]) is recommended to ensure factors that may facilitate unmet needs are appropriately considered and reported.