"Quite simply they don't communicate": a case study of a National Health Service response to staff suicide.

Workplace suicide can have significant knock-on effects within an organisation, yet research has shown within the healthcare profession, not all staff receive suicide prevention training, and few employers take the time to reflect on the need to change workplace policies or practices following the death of a staff member to suicide. How staff suicide is communicated across an organisation and to family members is important. Effective crisis communication is critical for effective management for a timely and sensitive response to a staff suicide within an organisation. By doing so, workplaces can help to reduce the significant emotional trauma suicide can have on an employee, and support good mental health across its workforce. This study aimed to explore and understand the communication processes around staff suicide across a National Health Service (NHS) Trust and to provide recommendations based on these findings. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 participants, each lasting approximately 90 min. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) guidelines were followed. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data, resulting in seven themes being identified based on communication. Findings indicated that the Trust had no clear communication strategy in place for tackling staff suicide. Each suicide was handled differently, training across staff roles was lacking and operational procedures were deemed insensitive. This paper aimed to provide insight into the communication strategies used in the aftermath of a staff suicide. These findings highlight the inconsistency of the communication, lack of clear policy and guidance and the negative impact this had on staff. Further research is needed across NHS Trusts nationwide to gain insight into the current communication strategies in place to develop a national approach to clear communication following the death of an NHS worker to suicide. Tweetable abstract: Effective communication is critical in the aftermath of an NHS staff suicide. By doing so, NHS Trusts can help to reduce the trauma suicide can have on an employee and support good mental health across its workforce @stann2.

Social norms and goal-setting interventions to promote responsible gambling in low-to-moderate online gamblers: protocol for a four-arm randomised controlled feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Gambling is increasingly recognised as an important public health issue. Problem gambling is associated with highly negative impacts on physical, psychological and social well-being, not only for those who gamble but also for those around them. There has been a rapid expansion of internet gambling and attributes such as continuous play and instant rewards, and enhanced privacy may lead to a greater likelihood of gambling-related harms. In this randomised controlled feasibility study, we are testing (1) the acceptability and feasibility of three online responsible gambling interventions targeting people with low-to-moderate risk of online problem gambling and (2) the feasibility of a future full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Four-arm randomised controlled feasibility study with qualitative substudy. One-hundred and forty UK residents with low-to-moderate risk of online gambling recruited via gambling operators and social media will be randomised (1:1:1:1) to either (1) goal setting, (2) descriptive norms messages (challenge perceptions of peer behaviours), (3) injunctive norms messages (challenge perceptions of peer attitudes) and (4) control (delayed intervention). Interventions will be delivered over 6 weeks and individually tailored. Outcomes, administered online, will be measured at baseline, 7 weeks, and 3 and 6 months post randomisation (including gambling risk behaviours and cognitions, anxiety and depression, quality of life, health use and productivity). Analyses will be descriptive, focusing on feasibility and acceptability of the interventions and study procedures. Telephone/online interviews, with a subsample of approximately 30 participants, will elicit experiences of participating in the study. Prespecified progression criteria will guide decisions around whether to progress to a definitive RCT. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval obtained from Bournemouth University Research Ethics Committee (reference number 33247). Participants will be given a participant information sheet plus a 'Key Facts' summary and will provide informed online consent. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences and public engagement events. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN37874344.

What's in the box? Exploring UK players' experiences of loot boxes in games; the conceptualisation and parallels with gambling.

Loot boxes are a popular mechanic within many video games, but it remains unclear if some forms of loot boxes can be seen of as gambling. However, the perspectives of players are often neglected, such as whether they see them as 'fair' game elements and how closely they feel this aligns with gambling. In this paper, we synthesise a conceptualisation for loot boxes through players' actual experience and explore if there are any parallels with gambling. Twenty-one participants who played video games took part in the research through either an interview or online survey. Thematic analysis suggested that six themes were core to exploring loot boxes: Random Chance Effects, Attitudes Towards Content, Implementation, Parallels with Gambling, Game Design, and The Player. The results suggested both indirect and direct parallels with gambling from the players experiences. Implications of game design and classifying loot boxes as gambling are discussed in relation to game design and risk factors of gambling and purchasing behaviour.