What Lies Beneath? The Role of Community Engagement in Translating COVID-19 Research Findings to Policy-Makers.

BACKGROUND: Community engagement is key to developing local and context-specific strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19. However, expedited research design and approval in the early days of the pandemic may have limited the opportunities for community members to influence pandemic-related research. In this study, we sought to understand how a Community Engagement Group (CEG) could impact a large longitudinal COVID-19 research project (Optimise), when involved solely in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of the research. METHODS: Seven community members were recruited for the CEG, representing a diverse range of groups. Each month, Optimise data of topical importance were compiled into a draft report. The CEG discussed the draft report at their monthly meeting and members' contributions were incorporated into the final report for distribution to policy-makers. In this study, a document analysis was undertaken of ten consecutive reports produced between February and November 2021. Each report was compared pre- and post- the inclusion of CEG contributions, which were then analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Community engagement in the interpretation and knowledge translation phases of Optimise had positive impacts on reports for policy-makers, including grounding the empirical findings in broader community perspectives, identifying policy issues affecting different groups and contributing unique insights beyond the empirical findings. Overall, the CEG contributions demonstrated the complexity of lived experience lying beneath the empirical data. CONCLUSION: Community engagement in the translation of the Optimise findings resulted in research reports to policy-makers that were reflective of a broader range of community perspectives, and that provided potential solutions to emerging policy issues related to COVID-19. This study adds to the evidence base about the impact of community engagement in the later interpretation and knowledge translation phases of research, particularly in the context of reporting to policy-makers during a public health emergency.

Priority populations' experiences of isolation, quarantine and distancing for COVID-19: protocol for a longitudinal cohort study (Optimise Study).

INTRODUCTION: Longitudinal studies can provide timely and accurate information to evaluate and inform COVID-19 control and mitigation strategies and future pandemic preparedness. The Optimise Study is a multidisciplinary research platform established in the Australian state of Victoria in September 2020 to collect epidemiological, social, psychological and behavioural data from priority populations. It aims to understand changing public attitudes, behaviours and experiences of COVID-19 and inform epidemic modelling and support responsive government policy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol paper describes the data collection procedures for the Optimise Study, an ongoing longitudinal cohort of ~1000 Victorian adults and their social networks. Participants are recruited using snowball sampling with a set of seeds and two waves of snowball recruitment. Seeds are purposively selected from priority groups, including recent COVID-19 cases and close contacts and people at heightened risk of infection and/or adverse outcomes of COVID-19 infection and/or public health measures. Participants complete a schedule of monthly quantitative surveys and daily diaries for up to 24 months, plus additional surveys annually for up to 48 months. Cohort participants are recruited for qualitative interviews at key time points to enable in-depth exploration of people's lived experiences. Separately, community representatives are invited to participate in community engagement groups, which review and interpret research findings to inform policy and practice recommendations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Optimise longitudinal cohort and qualitative interviews are approved by the Alfred Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (# 333/20). The Optimise Study CEG is approved by the La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (# HEC20532). All participants provide informed verbal consent to enter the cohort, with additional consent provided prior to any of the sub studies. Study findings will be disseminated through public website (https://optimisecovid.com.au/study-findings/) and through peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05323799.

Inclusion of Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in COVID-19 Public Health Research: Research Design Adaptations to Seek Different Perspectives in Victoria, Australia.

Participation of people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities in public health research is often limited by challenges with recruitment, retention and second-language data collection. Consequently, people from CALD communities are at risk of their needs being marginalised in public health interventions. This paper presents intrinsic case analyses of two studies which were adapted to increase the cultural competence of research processes. Both cases were part of the Optimise study, a major mixed methods research study in Australia which provided evidence to inform the Victorian state government's decision-making about COVID-19 public health measures. Case study 1 involved the core Optimise longitudinal cohort study and Case study 2 was the CARE Victorian representative survey, an Optimise sub-study. Both case studies engaged cultural advisors and bilingual staff to adjust the survey measures and research processes to suit target CALD communities. Reflexive processes provided insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the inclusive strategies. Selected survey results are provided, demonstrating variation across CALD communities and in comparison to participants who reported speaking English at home. While in most cases a gradient of disadvantage was evident for CALD communities, some patterns were unexpected. The case studies demonstrate the challenge and value of investing in culturally competent research processes to ensure research guiding policy captures a spectrum of experiences and perspectives.

Three trajectories of gestational weight gain identified in an Australian twin study.

OBJECTIVES: Gestational weight gain (GWG) has been associated with maternal and child health outcomes, but knowledge of appropriate GWG for twin gestations is limited. STUDY DESIGN: The Peri/Postnatal Epigenetic Twins Study is a prospective twin cohort study of 250 women and their twin children in Melbourne, Australia. We modeled trajectories of GWG using group-based growth modeling and compared these trajectories to GWG categories (within, above, or below current GWG recommendations for twin pregnancy). We fitted robust linear and Poisson regression models to assess associations of maternal pre-pregnancy and gestational exposures with risk of gaining weight outside the recommendations. RESULTS: Of the 250 women enrolled in the PETS, GWG measures were available for 172 women. Forty-seven percent of women had GWG within the current recommendations. We identified three GWG trajectories - 23.6% of women had low GWG throughout pregnancy, 34.5% had average GWG throughout pregnancy, and 42.0% had average initial GWG, followed by high GWG from trimester two until delivery. Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) was associated with increased risk of inadequate GWG (RR: 2.40, 95%CI: 1.53, 3.75). Pre-pregnancy obesity (RR: 1.88, 95%CI: 1.09, 3.26) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR: 2.64, 95%CI: 1.20, 5.81) were associated with increased risk of excessive GWG. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the women in the PETS did not meet the current GWG recommendations. Women with GDM or hypertensive disorders were more likely to gain weight outside these guidelines. More research is needed to establish comprehensive guidelines for twin pregnancies.

Gestational weight gain is associated with childhood height, weight and BMI in the Peri/Postnatal Epigenetic Twins Study.

Multifetal pregnancies are at risk of adverse maternal, neonatal and long-term health outcomes, and gestational weight gain (GWG) is a potentially modifiable risk factor for several of these. However, studies assessing the associations of GWG with long-term health in twins are rare, and studies which do assess these associations in twins often do not account for gestational age. Since longer gestations are likely to lead to larger GWG and lower risk of adverse outcomes, adjusting for gestational age is necessary to better understand the association of GWG with twin health outcomes. We aimed to explore long-term associations of GWG-for-gestational-age with twin anthropometric measures. The Peri/Postnatal Epigenetic Twins Study (PETS) is a prospective cohort study, which recruited women pregnant with twins from 2007 to 2009. Twins were followed-up at 18 months and 6 years of age. GWG-for-gestational-age z-scores were calculated from pre-pregnancy weight and weight at delivery. We fitted regression models to assess associations of GWG with twin weight, height and BMI at birth, 18 months, and 6 years. Of the 250 women in the PETS, 172 had GWG measured throughout pregnancy. Overall, higher GWG-for-gestational-age z-scores were associated with higher birthweight (ß: 0.32 z-scores, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 0.19, 0.45), BMI (ß: 0.29 z-scores, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.43) and length (ß: 0.27 z-scores, 95% CI: 0.09, 0.45). However, these associations were not observed at 18 months or 6 years of age. GWG was associated with twin length, weight and BMI at birth but not during childhood. Further research is needed to determine the long-term effects of GWG on twin health outcomes.

The child as the presenting symptom, and what happens when things go wrong?

In this paper I wish to draw attention to Balint's concept of 'the Child as the presenting symptom' and ask whether this concept is relevant to us as psychiatrists. What arises is whether this concept might illuminate situations where there is serious mental illness in the family, and whether the presentation of a child to a doctor might be indicative of mental illness in the family. If such an interpretation is possible, then there are important clinical implications, since at present, all UK government guidance, based on the analysis of many high-profile cases where children have been severely abused, is that the needs of the child are paramount, and thence it may be that, whilst quite dramatic intervention may well occur in order to protect the child, perhaps the mental health needs of the parents might be somewhat overlooked. Examples of the interplay between child and parents in the context of mental illness are given, and the present way in which children within families where there is mental illness are cared for is described, also considering the consequences for the parents.

Predisposing factors for occasional and multiple falls in older Australians who live at home.

This study, which was part of a larger study on the Health Status of Older People conducted in Melbourne, Australia, aimed to identify factors that discriminate between multiple and occasional falls amongst older people living at home. It used a survey of 1000 Australians aged 65 years and over. Subjects were classified as multiple fallers (two or more falls in the past year), occasional fallers (one fall in the past year), or non-fallers. Twenty-nine percent of older people who lived at home reported falling once or more in the previous 12 months. Nearly 20% of older people fell once in the previous 12 months and just under 10% fell more than once. Occasional fallers were more likely to be women (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.45), to have reported back pain (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.16) and were nearly twice as likely to have more than three medical conditions compared to non-fallers (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.90). Multiple fallers were also more likely to be women (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.51). More multiple fallers (17%) than occasional fallers (9%) reported being very afraid of falling. Intervention strategies should take into account these differing predisposing factors for multiple and occasional falls.