Comparing indicators of disease severity among patients presenting to hospital for urinary tract infections before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients may have delayed seeking healthcare for urinary tract infections (UTIs). This could have resulted in more severe presentation to hospital and different antibiotic usage. Objectives: We explored evidence for such changes through existing national indicators of prescribing, and routine clinical data collected in the electronic health record (EHR). Methods: We carried out a retrospective cohort study of patients presenting to two UK hospitals for UTIs, comparing two indicators of disease severity on admission before and during the pandemic: intravenous (IV) antibiotic use, and National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2). We developed regression models to estimate the effect of the pandemic on each outcome, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity and index of multiple deprivation. Results: During the pandemic, patients were less likely to present to hospital for UTI with NEWS2 of 0 or 1 [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52-0.85] compared with before, more likely to present with score 2 (aOR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.18-1.94), whereas the likelihood of presenting with a NEWS2 of >2 remained the same (aOR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.87-1.29). We did not find evidence that this limited increase in disease severity resulted in changes to IV antibiotic use on admission (adjusted risk ratio: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.91-1.15). Conclusions: There may have been a small increase in disease severity at hospital presentation for UTI during the pandemic, which can be detected using routine data and not through national indicators of prescribing. Further research is required to validate these findings and understand whether routine data could support a more nuanced understanding of local antimicrobial prescribing practices.

How should a cluster randomized trial be analyzed?

In cluster randomized trials, individuals from the same cluster tend to have more similar outcomes than individuals from different clusters. This correlation must be taken into account in the analysis of every cluster trial to avoid incorrect inferences. In this paper, we describe the principles guiding the analysis of cluster trials including how to correctly account for intra-cluster correlations as well as how to analyze more advanced designs such as stepped-wedge and cluster cross-over trials. We then describe how to handle specific issues such as small sample sizes and missing data.

What type of cluster randomized trial for which setting?

The cluster randomized trial allows a randomized evaluation when it is either not possible to randomize the individual or randomizing individuals would put the trial at high risk of contamination across treatment arms. There are many variations of the cluster randomized design, including the parallel design with or without baseline measures, the cluster randomized cross-over design, the stepped-wedge cluster randomized design, and more recently-developed variants such as the batched stepped-wedge design and the staircase design. Once it has been clearly established that there is a need for cluster randomization, one ever important question is which form the cluster design should take. If a design in which time is split into multiple trial periods is to be adopted (e.g. as in a stepped-wedge), researchers must decide whether the same participants should be measured in multiple trial periods (cohort sampling); or if different participants should be measured in each period (continual recruitment or cross-sectional sampling). Here we outline the different possible options and weigh up the pros and cons of the different design choices, which revolve around statistical efficiency, study logistics and the assumptions required.

Exploring the association between unintended pregnancies and unmet contraceptive needs among Ugandan women of reproductive age: an analysis of the 2016 Uganda demographic and health survey.

BACKGROUND: Unintended pregnancy and unmet contraceptive needs pose significant public health challenges, particularly in developing nations, where they contribute to maternal health risks. While previous research has explored determinants of unintended pregnancies, there remains a gap in understanding the association between unplanned pregnancies and unmet contraceptive needs among Ugandan women of reproductive age. This study aimed to assess unmet contraceptive needs and their correlation with unintended pregnancies and other factors in Uganda, utilizing a nationally representative sample. METHODS: Data was extracted from the 2016 Uganda Demographic Health Survey (UDHS), a cross-sectional survey conducted in the latter half of 2016. The study encompassed 18,506 women aged 15-49 with a history of at least one prior pregnancy. The primary outcome variable was the planning status of the most recent pregnancy, while the principal independent variable was unmet contraceptive need. Additional variables were controlled in the analysis. Data analysis was performed using STATA version 17, involving descriptive analysis, cross-tabulation, chi-square testing, and logistic regression. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: A substantial proportion of women reported unintended pregnancies (44.5%), with approximately 21.09% experiencing an unmet need for contraception. In the adjusted model, women with unmet contraceptive needs had 3.97 times higher odds of unintended pregnancy (95% CI = 3.61-4.37) compared to those with met contraceptive needs. Significant factors linked to unintended pregnancies included women's age, place of residence, household wealth status, decision-making authority regarding contraceptive use, educational attainment, husband's occupation, and educational level. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that both the rate of unintended pregnancies and unmet contraceptive needs in Uganda exceeded the global average, warranting urgent policy attention. Addressing unmet contraceptive needs emerges as a potential strategy to curtail unintended pregnancies. Further qualitative research may be necessary to elucidate the sociocultural and behavioral determinants of unwanted pregnancies, facilitating context-specific interventions.

Built Environment and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in Long-Term Care Facilities: Cross-Sectional Survey and Data Linkage.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the built environment in long-term care facilities (LTCF) and its association with introduction and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey with linkage to routine surveillance data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: LTCFs in England caring for adults ≥65 years old, participating in the VIVALDI study (ISRCTN14447421) were eligible. Data were included from residents and staff. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of the LTCF built environment with linkage to routinely collected asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 testing and vaccination data between September 1, 2020, and March 31, 2022. We used individual and LTCF level Poisson and Negative Binomial regression models to identify risk factors for 4 outcomes: incidence rate of resident infections and outbreaks, outbreak size, and duration. We considered interactions with variant transmissibility (pre vs post Omicron dominance). RESULTS: A total of 134 of 151 (88.7%) LTCFs participated in the survey, contributing data for 13,010 residents and 17,766 staff. After adjustment and stratification, outbreak incidence (measuring infection introduction) was only associated with SARS-CoV-2 incidence in the community [incidence rate ratio (IRR) for high vs low incidence, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.85-4.36]. Characteristics of the built environment were associated with transmission outcomes and differed by variant transmissibility. For resident infection incidence, factors included number of storeys (0.64; 0.43-0.97) and bedrooms (1.04; 1.02-1.06), and purpose-built vs converted buildings (1.99; 1.08-3.69). Air quality was associated with outbreak size (dry vs just right 1.46; 1.00-2.13). Funding model (0.99; 0.99-1.00), crowding (0.98; 0.96-0.99), and bedroom temperature (1.15; 1.01-1.32) were associated with outbreak duration. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: We describe previously undocumented diversity in LTCF built environments. LTCFs have limited opportunities to prevent SARS-CoV-2 introduction, which was only driven by community incidence. However, adjusting the built environment, for example by isolating infected residents or improving airflow, may reduce transmission, although data quality was limited by subjectivity. Identifying LTCF built environment modifications that prevent infection transmission should be a research priority.

Shaping care home COVID-19 testing policy: a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of asymptomatic testing compared with standard care in care home staff (VIVALDI-CT).

INTRODUCTION: Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial.The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages.The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the London-Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13296529.

Prevalence of Curable Sexually Transmitted Infections in a Population-Representative Sample of Young Adults in a High HIV Incidence Area in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Recent population-representative estimates of sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevalence in high HIV burden areas in southern Africa are limited. We estimated the prevalence and associated factors of 3 STIs among adolescents and young adults (AYA) in rural South Africa. METHODS: Between March 2020 and May 2021, a population-representative sample of AYA aged 16 to 29 years were randomly selected from a Health and Demographic Surveillance Site in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, for a 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial. Participants in 2 intervention arms were offered baseline testing for gonorrhea, chlamydia, and trichomoniasis using GeneXpert. Prevalence estimates were weighted for participation bias, and logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with STIs. RESULTS: Of 2323 eligible AYA, 1743 (75%) enrolled in the trial. Among 863 eligible for STI testing, 814 (94%) provided specimens (median age of 21.8 years, 52% female, and 71% residing in rural areas). Population-weighted prevalence estimates were 5.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2%-5.8%) for gonorrhea, 17.9% (16.5%-19.3%) for chlamydia, 5.4% (4.6%-6.3%) for trichomoniasis, and 23.7% (22.2%-25.3%) for any STI. In multivariable models, female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.24; 95% CI, 1.48-3.09) and urban/periurban (vs. rural) residence (aOR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.02-2.15) were associated with STIs; recent migration was associated with lower odds of STI (aOR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.89). Among those with an STI, 53 (31.0%) were treated within 7 days; median time to treatment was 11 days (interquartile range, 6-77 days). CONCLUSIONS: We identified a high prevalence of curable STIs among AYA in rural South Africa. Improved access to STI testing to enable etiologic diagnosis and rapid treatment is needed.

Effect of multi-level interventions on mental health outcomes among adolescents in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), multiple factors contribute to the considerable burden of mental health disorders among adolescents, highlighting the need for interventions that address underlying risks at multiple levels. We reviewed evidence of the effectiveness of community or family-level interventions, with and without individual level interventions, on mental health disorders among adolescents in SSA. DESIGN: Systematic review using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted on Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCINFO and Web of Science up to 31 March 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were eligible for inclusion in the review if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled quasi-experimental studies conducted in sub-Saharan African countries and measured the effect of an intervention on common mental disorders in adolescents aged 10-24 years. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We included studies that assessed the effect of interventions on depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and substance abuse. Substance abuse was only considered if it was measured alongside mental health disorders. The findings were summarised using synthesis without meta-analysis, where studies were grouped according to the type of intervention (multi-level, community-level) and participants. RESULTS: Of 1197 studies that were identified, 30 studies (17 RCTs and 3 quasi-experimental studies) were included in the review of which 10 delivered multi-level interventions and 20 delivered community-level interventions. Synthesised findings suggest that multi-level interventions comprise economic empowerment, peer-support, cognitive behavioural therapy were effective in improving mental health among vulnerable adolescents. Majority of studies that delivered interventions to community groups reported significant positive changes in mental health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from this review suggests that multi-level interventions can reduce mental health disorders in adolescents. Further research is needed to understand the reliability and sustainability of these promising interventions in different African contexts. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021258826.

An observer-blinded, cluster randomised trial of a typhoid conjugate vaccine in an urban South Indian cohort.

BACKGROUND: Typhoid fever causes nearly 110,000 deaths among 9.24 million cases globally and disproportionately affects developing countries. As a control measure in such regions, typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCVs) are recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). We present here the protocol of a cluster randomised vaccine trial to assess the impact of introducing TyphiBEV® vaccine to those between 1 and 30 years of age in a high-burden setting. METHODS: The primary objective is to determine the relative and absolute rate reduction of symptomatic, blood-culture-confirmed S. Typhi infection among participants vaccinated with TyphiBEV® in vaccine clusters compared with the unvaccinated participants in non-vaccine clusters. The study population is residents of 30 wards of Vellore (a South Indian city) with participants between the ages of 1 and 30 years who provide informed consent. The wards will be divided into 60 contiguous clusters and 30 will be randomly selected for its participants to receive TyphiBEV® at the start of the study. No placebo/control is planned for the non-intervention clusters, which will receive the vaccine at the end of the trial. Participants will not be blinded to their intervention. Episodes of typhoid fever among participants will be captured via stimulated, passive fever surveillance in the area for 2 years after vaccination, which will include the most utilised healthcare facilities. Observers blinded to the participants' intervention statuses will record illness details. Relative and absolute rate reductions will be calculated at the end of this surveillance and used to estimate vaccine effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The results from our trial will allow countries to make better-informed decisions regarding the TCV that they will roll-out and may improve the global supplies and affordability of the vaccines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI) CTRI/2022/03/041314. Prospectively registered on 23 March 2022 ( https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pmaindet2.php?trialid=62548&EncHid=&userName=vellore%20typhoid ). CTRI collects the full WHO Trial Registration Data Set.

Thetha Nami ngithethe nawe (Let's Talk): a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial of social mobilisation by peer navigators into community-based sexual health and HIV care, including pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), to reduce sexually transmissible HIV amongst young people in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) through universal test and treat (UTT) and HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) substantially reduces HIV-related mortality and incidence. Effective ART based prevention has not translated into population-level impact in southern Africa due to sub-optimal coverage among youth. We aim to investigate the effectiveness, implementation and cost effectiveness of peer-led social mobilisation into decentralised integrated HIV and sexual reproductive health (SRH) services amongst adolescents and young adults in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). METHODS: We are conducting a type 1a hybrid effectiveness/implementation study, with a cluster randomized stepped-wedge trial (SWT) to assess effectiveness and a realist process evaluation to assess implementation outcomes. The SWT will be conducted in 40 clusters in rural KZN over 45 months. Clusters will be randomly allocated to receive the intervention in period 1 (early) or period 2 (delayed). 1) Intervention arm: Resident peer navigators in each cluster will approach young men and women aged 15-30 years living in their cluster to conduct health, social and educational needs assessment and tailor psychosocial support and health promotion, peer mentorship, and facilitate referrals into nurse led mobile clinics that visit each cluster regularly to deliver integrated SRH and differentiated HIV prevention (HIV testing, UTT for those positive, and PrEP for those eligible and negative). Standard of Care is UTT and PrEP delivered to 15-30 year olds from control clusters through primary health clinics. There are 3 co-primary outcomes measured amongst cross sectional surveys of 15-30 year olds: 1) effectiveness of the intervention in reducing the prevalence of sexually transmissible HIV; 2) uptake of universal risk informed HIV prevention intervention; 3) cost of transmissible HIV infection averted. We will use a realist process evaluation to interrogate the extent to which the intervention components support demand, uptake, and retention in risk-differentiated biomedical HIV prevention. DISCUSSION: The findings of this trial will be used by policy makers to optimize delivery of universal differentiated HIV prevention, including HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis through peer-led mobilisation into community-based integrated adolescent and youth friendly HIV and sexual and reproductive health care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier-NCT05405582. Registered: 6th June 2022.

Effectiveness of successive booster vaccine doses against SARS-CoV-2 related mortality in residents of long-term care facilities in the VIVALDI study.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused severe disease in unvaccinated long-term care facility (LTCF) residents. Initial booster vaccination following primary vaccination is known to provide strong short-term protection, but data are limited on duration of protection and the protective effect of further booster vaccinations. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of third, fourth and fifth dose booster vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 related mortality amongst older residents of LTCFs. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: LTCFs for older people in England participating in the VIVALDI study. METHODS: Residents aged >65 years at participating LTCFs were eligible for inclusion if they had at least one polymerase chain reaction or lateral flow device result within the analysis period 1 January 2022 to 31 December 2022. We excluded individuals who had not received at least two vaccine doses before the analysis period. Cox regression was used to estimate relative hazards of SARS-CoV-2 related mortality following 1-3 booster vaccinations compared with primary vaccination, stratified by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and adjusting for age, sex and LTCF size (total beds). RESULTS: A total of 13,407 residents were included. Our results indicate that third, fourth and fifth dose booster vaccination provide additional short-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 related mortality relative to primary vaccination, with consistent stabilisation beyond 112 days to 45-75% reduction in risk relative to primary vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Successive booster vaccination doses provide additional short-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 related mortality amongst older LTCF residents. However, we did not find evidence of a longer-term reduction in risk beyond that provided by initial booster vaccination.

Site staff perspectives on communicating trial results to participants: Cost and feasibility results from the Show RESPECT cluster randomised, factorial, mixed-methods trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Sharing trial results with participants is an ethical imperative but often does not happen. Show RESPECT (ISRCTN96189403) tested ways of sharing results with participants in an ovarian cancer trial (ISRCTN10356387). Sharing results via a printed summary improved patient satisfaction. Little is known about staff experience and the costs of communicating results with participants. We report the costs of communication approaches used in Show RESPECT and the views of site staff on these approaches. METHODS: We allocated 43 hospitals (sites) to share results with trial participants through one of eight intervention combinations (2 × 2 × 2 factorial; enhanced versus basic webpage, printed summary versus no printed summary, email list invitation versus no invitation). Questionnaires elicited data from staff involved in sharing results. Open- and closed-ended questions covered resources used to share results and site staff perspectives on the approaches used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Interview and free-text data were analysed thematically. The mean additional site costs per participant from each intervention were estimated jointly as main effects by linear regression. RESULTS: We received questionnaires from 68 staff from 41 sites and interviewed 11 site staff. Sites allocated to the printed summary had mean total site costs of sharing results £13.71/patient higher (95% confidence interval (CI): -3.19, 30.60; p = 0.108) than sites allocated no printed summary. Sites allocated to the enhanced webpage had mean total site costs £1.91/patient higher (95% CI: -14, 18.74; p = 0.819) than sites allocated to the basic webpage. Sites allocated to the email list had costs £2.87/patient lower (95% CI: -19.70, 13.95; p = 0.731) than sites allocated to no email list. Most of these costs were staff time for mailing information and handling patients' queries. Most site staff reported no concerns about how they had shared results (88%) and no challenges (76%). Most (83%) found it easy to answer queries from patients about the results and thought the way they were allocated to share results with participants would be an acceptable standard approach (76%), with 79% saying they would follow the same approach for future trials. There were no significant effects of the randomised interventions on these outcomes. Site staff emphasised the importance of preparing patients to receive the results, including giving opt-in/opt-out options, and the need to offer further support, particularly if the results could confuse or distress some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a printed summary to a webpage (which significantly improved participant satisfaction) may increase costs to sites by ~£14/patient, which is modest in relation to the cost of trials. The Show RESPECT communication interventions were feasible to implement. This information could help future trials ensure they have sufficient resources to share results with participants.

Contextual factors affecting the implementation of an anemia focused virtual counseling intervention for pregnant women in plains Nepal: a mixed methods process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is estimated to cause 115,000 maternal deaths each year. In Nepal, 46% of pregnant women have anemia. As part of an integrated anemia-prevention strategy, family engagement and counseling of pregnant women can increase compliance to iron folic acid tablets, but marginalized women often have lower access to these interventions. We implemented the VALID (Virtual antenatal intervention for improved diet and iron intake) randomized controlled trial to test a family-focused virtual counseling mHealth intervention designed to inclusively increase iron folic acid compliance in rural Nepal; here we report findings from our process evaluation research. METHODS: We conducted semi structured interviews with 20 pregnant women who had received the intervention, eight husbands, seven mothers-in-laws and four health workers. We did four focus groups discussions with intervention implementers, 39 observations of counseling, and used routine monitoring data in our evaluation. We used inductive and deductive analysis of qualitative data, and descriptive statistics of monitoring data. RESULTS: We were able to implement the intervention largely as planned and all participants liked the dialogical counseling approach and use of story-telling to trigger conversation. However, an unreliable and inaccessible mobile network impeded training families about how to use the mobile device, arrange the counseling time, and conduct the counseling. Women were not equally confident using mobile devices, and the need to frequently visit households to troubleshoot negated the virtual nature of the intervention for some. Women's lack of agency restricted both their ability to speak freely and their mobility, which meant that some women were unable to move to areas with better mobile reception. It was difficult for some women to schedule the counseling, as there were competing demands on their time. Family members were difficult to engage because they were often working outside the home; the small screen made it difficult to interact, and some women were uncomfortable speaking in front of family members. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to understand gender norms, mobile access, and mobile literacy before implementing an mHealth intervention. The contextual barriers to implementation meant that we were not able to engage family members as much as we had hoped, and we were not able to minimize in-person contact with families. We recommend a flexible approach to mHealth interventions which can be responsive to local context and the situation of participants. Home visits may be more effective for those women who are most marginalized, lack confidence in using a mobile device, and where internet access is poor.

Informative cluster size in cluster-randomised trials: A case study from the TRIGGER trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent work has shown that cluster-randomised trials can estimate two distinct estimands: the participant-average and cluster-average treatment effects. These can differ when participant outcomes or the treatment effect depends on the cluster size (termed informative cluster size). In this case, estimators that target one estimand (such as the analysis of unweighted cluster-level summaries, which targets the cluster-average effect) may be biased for the other. Furthermore, commonly used estimators such as mixed-effects models or generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure can be biased for both estimands. However, there has been little empirical research into whether informative cluster size is likely to occur in practice. METHOD: We re-analysed a cluster-randomised trial comparing two different thresholds for red blood cell transfusion in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding to explore whether estimates for the participant- and cluster-average effects differed, to provide empirical evidence for whether informative cluster size may be present. For each outcome, we first estimated a participant-average effect using independence estimating equations, which are unbiased under informative cluster size. We then compared this to two further methods: (1) a cluster-average effect estimated using either weighted independence estimating equations or unweighted cluster-level summaries, and (2) estimates from a mixed-effects model or generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure. We then performed a small simulation study to evaluate whether observed differences between cluster- and participant-average estimates were likely to occur even if no informative cluster size was present. RESULTS: For most outcomes, treatment effect estimates from different methods were similar. However, differences of >10% occurred between participant- and cluster-average estimates for 5 of 17 outcomes (29%). We also observed several notable differences between estimates from mixed-effects models or generalised estimating equations with an exchangeable correlation structure and those based on independence estimating equations. For example, for the EQ-5D VAS score, the independence estimating equation estimate of the participant-average difference was 4.15 (95% confidence interval: -3.37 to 11.66), compared with 2.84 (95% confidence interval: -7.37 to 13.04) for the cluster-average independence estimating equation estimate, and 3.23 (95% confidence interval: -6.70 to 13.16) from a mixed-effects model. Similarly, for thromboembolic/ischaemic events, the independence estimating equation estimate for the participant-average odds ratio was 0.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.07 to 2.48), compared with 0.33 (95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 1.77) from the cluster-average estimator. CONCLUSION: In this re-analysis, we found that estimates from the various approaches could differ, which may be due to the presence of informative cluster size. Careful consideration of the estimand and the plausibility of assumptions underpinning each estimator can help ensure an appropriate analysis methods are used. Independence estimating equations and the analysis of cluster-level summaries (with appropriate weighting for each to correspond to either the participant-average or cluster-average treatment effect) are a desirable choice when informative cluster size is deemed possible, due to their unbiasedness in this setting.

Economic evaluation of participatory women's groups scaled up by the public health system to improve birth outcomes in Jharkhand, eastern India.

An estimated 2.4 million newborn infants died in 2020, 80% of them in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. To achieve the Sustainable Development Target for neonatal mortality reduction, countries with high mortality need to implement evidence-based, cost-effective interventions at scale. Our study aimed to estimate the cost, cost-effectiveness, and benefit-cost ratio of a participatory women's groups intervention scaled up by the public health system in Jharkhand, eastern India. The intervention was evaluated through a pragmatic cluster non-randomised controlled trial in six districts. We estimated the cost of the intervention at scale from a provider perspective, with a 42-month time horizon for 20 districts. We estimated costs using a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches. All costs were adjusted for inflation, discounted at 3% per year, and converted to 2020 International Dollars (INT$). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated using extrapolated effect sizes for the impact of the intervention in 20 districts, in terms of cost per neonatal deaths averted and cost per life year saved. We assessed the impact of uncertainty on results through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. We also estimated benefit-cost ratio using a benefit transfer approach. Total intervention costs for 20 districts were INT$ 15,017,396. The intervention covered an estimated 1.6 million livebirths across 20 districts, translating to INT$ 9.4 per livebirth covered. ICERs were estimated at INT$ 1,272 per neonatal death averted or INT$ 41 per life year saved. Net benefit estimates ranged from INT$ 1,046 million to INT$ 3,254 million, and benefit-cost ratios from 71 to 218. Our study suggests that participatory women's groups scaled up by the Indian public health system were highly cost-effective in improving neonatal survival and had a very favourable return on investment. The intervention can be scaled up in similar settings within India and other countries.

Strong peak immunogenicity but rapid antibody waning following third vaccine dose in older residents of care homes.

Third-dose coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines are being deployed widely but their efficacy has not been assessed adequately in vulnerable older people who exhibit suboptimal responses after primary vaccination series. This observational study, which was carried out by the VIVALDI study based in England, looked at spike-specific immune responses in 341 staff and residents in long-term care facilities who received an mRNA vaccine following dual primary series vaccination with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Third-dose vaccination strongly increased antibody responses with preferential relative enhancement in older people and was required to elicit neutralization of Omicron. Cellular immune responses were also enhanced with strong cross-reactive recognition of Omicron. However, antibody titers fell 21-78% within 100 d after vaccine and 27% of participants developed a breakthrough Omicron infection. These findings reveal strong immunogenicity of a third vaccine in one of the most vulnerable population groups and endorse an approach for widespread delivery across this population. Ongoing assessment will be required to determine the stability of immune protection.

Antenatal detection of large-for-gestational-age fetuses following implementation of the Growth Assessment Protocol: secondary analysis of a randomised control trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) affects the antenatal detection of large for gestational age (LGA) or maternal and perinatal outcomes amongst LGA babies. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a pragmatic open randomised cluster control trial comparing the GAP with standard care. SETTING: Eleven UK maternity units. POPULATION: Pregnant women and their LGA babies born at ≥36+0  weeks of gestation. METHODS: Clusters were randomly allocated to GAP implementation or standard care. Data were collected from electronic patient records. Trial arms were compared using summary statistics, with unadjusted and adjusted (two-stage cluster summary approach) differences. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of detection of LGA (estimated fetal weight on ultrasound scan above the 90th centile after 34+0  weeks of gestation, defined by either population or customised growth charts), maternal and perinatal outcomes (e.g. mode of birth, postpartum haemorrhage, severe perineal tears, birthweight and gestational age, neonatal unit admission, perinatal mortality, and neonatal morbidity and mortality). RESULTS: A total of 506 LGA babies were exposed to GAP and 618 babies received standard care. There were no significant differences in the rate of LGA detection (GAP 38.0% vs standard care 48.0%; adjusted effect size -4.9%; 95% CI -20.5, 10.7; p = 0.54), nor in any of the maternal or perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of GAP did not change the rate of antenatal ultrasound detection of LGA when compared with standard care.

Sexual and reproductive health in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional population survey (Natsal-COVID-Wave 2) and national surveillance data.

OBJECTIVES: To assess sexual behaviour, and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes, after 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. METHODS: 6658 participants aged 18-59 and resident in Britain completed a cross-sectional web-panel survey (Natsal-COVID-Wave 2, March-April 2021), 1 year after the first lockdown. Natsal-COVID-2 follows the Natsal-COVID-Wave 1 survey (July-August 2020) which captured impacts in the initial months. Quota-based sampling and weighting resulted in a quasi-representative population sample. Data were contextualised with reference to the most recent probability sample population data (Natsal-3; collected 2010-12; 15 162 participants aged 16-74) and national surveillance data on recorded sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, conceptions, and abortions in England/Wales (2010-2020). The main outcomes were: sexual behaviour; SRH service use; pregnancy, abortion and fertility management; sexual dissatisfaction, distress and difficulties. RESULTS: In the year from the first lockdown, over two-thirds of participants reported one or more sexual partners (women 71.8%; men 69.9%), while fewer than 20.0% reported a new partner (women 10.4%; men 16.8%). Median occasions of sex per month was two. Compared with 2010-12 (Natsal-3), we found less sexual risk behaviour (lower reporting of multiple partners, new partners, and new condomless partners), including among younger participants and those reporting same-sex behaviour. One in 10 women reported a pregnancy; pregnancies were fewer than in 2010-12 and less likely to be scored as unplanned. 19.3% of women and 22.8% of men were distressed or worried about their sex life, significantly more than in 2010-12. Compared with surveillance trends from 2010 to 2019, we found lower than expected use of STI-related services and HIV testing, lower levels of chlamydia testing, and fewer conceptions and abortions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with significant changes in sexual behaviour, SRH, and service uptake in the year following the first lockdown in Britain. These data are foundational to SRH recovery and policy planning.

Contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

BACKGROUND: Contraceptive services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: Natsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6658 adults aged 18-59 years between March and April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18-44 years, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use, contraceptive switching due to the pandemic, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness. RESULTS: Of 1488 participants, 1619 were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, of whom 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. Among all participants, 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. 29.3% (26.9%-31.8%) of at-risk participants reported seeking contraceptive services, of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported difficulty accessing services. Clinic closures and cancelled appointments were commonly reported pandemic-related reasons for difficulty accessing services. This unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) scored as 'unplanned'; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment. CONCLUSIONS: Just under a third of participants sought contraceptive services during the pandemic and most were successful, indicating resilience and adaptability of service delivery. However, one in six reported an unmet need due to the pandemic. COVID-induced inequalities in service access potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.

Community participatory learning and action cycle groups to reduce type 2 diabetes in Bangladesh (D:Clare): an updated study protocol for a parallel arm cluster randomised controlled trial.

The "Diabetes: Community-led Awareness, Response and Evaluation" (D:Clare) trial aims to scale up and replicate an evidence-based participatory learning and action cycle intervention in Bangladesh, to inform policy on population-level T2DM prevention and control.The trial was originally designed as a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial, with the interventions running from March 2020 to September 2022. Twelve clusters were randomly allocated (1:1) to implement the intervention at months 1 or 12 in two steps, and evaluated through three cross-sectional surveys at months 1, 12 and 24. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we suspended project activities on the 20th of March 2020. As a result of the changed risk landscape and the delays introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic, we changed from the stepped-wedge design to a wait-list parallel arm cluster RCT (cRCT) with baseline data. We had four key reasons for eventually agreeing to change designs: equipoise, temporal bias in exposure and outcomes, loss of power and time and funding considerations.Trial registration ISRCTN42219712 . Registered on 31 October 2019.