Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of text messages with or without endowment incentives for weight management in men with obesity (Game of Stones): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Obesity increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, mobility problems and some cancers, and its prevalence is rising. Men engage less than women in existing weight loss interventions. Game of Stones builds on a successful feasibility study and aims to find out if automated text messages with or without endowment incentives are effective and cost-effective for weight loss at 12 months compared to a waiting list comparator arm in men with obesity. METHODS: A 3-arm, parallel group, assessor-blind superiority randomised controlled trial with process evaluation will recruit 585 adult men with body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or more living in and around three UK centres (Belfast, Bristol, Glasgow), purposively targeting disadvantaged areas. Intervention groups: (i) automated, theory-informed text messages daily for 12 months plus endowment incentives linked to verified weight loss targets at 3, 6 and 12 months; (ii) the same text messages and weight loss assessment protocol; (iii) comparator group: 12 month waiting list, then text messages for 3 months. The primary outcome is percentage weight change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes at 12 months are as follows: quality of life, wellbeing, mental health, weight stigma, behaviours, satisfaction and confidence. Follow-up includes weight at 24 months. A health economic evaluation will measure cost-effectiveness over the trial and over modelled lifetime: including health service resource-use and quality-adjusted life years. The cost-utility analysis will report incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years gained. Participant and service provider perspectives will be explored via telephone interviews, and exploratory mixed methods process evaluation analyses will focus on mental health, multiple long-term conditions, health inequalities and implementation strategies. DISCUSSION: The trial will report whether text messages (with and without cash incentives) can help men to lose weight over 1 year and maintain this for another year compared to a comparator group; the costs and benefits to the health service; and men's experiences of the interventions. Process analyses with public involvement and service commissioner input will ensure that this open-source digital self-care intervention could be sustainable and scalable by a range of NHS or public services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 91974895 . Registered on 14/04/2021.

Rugby Fans in Training New Zealand (RUFIT NZ): a randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a healthy lifestyle program for overweight men delivered through professional rugby clubs.

BACKGROUND: A healthy lifestyle program that appeals to, and supports, overweight and obese New Zealand (NZ) European, Maori (indigenous) and Pasifika men to achieve weight loss is urgently needed. A pilot program inspired by the successful Football Fans in Training program but delivered via professional rugby clubs in NZ (n = 96) was shown to be effective in weight loss, adherence to healthy lifestyle behaviors, and cardiorespiratory fitness in overweight and obese men. A full effectiveness trial is now needed. AIMS: To determine the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of Rugby Fans In Training-NZ (RUFIT-NZ) on weight loss, fitness, blood pressure, lifestyle change, and health related quality of life (HRQoL) at 12- and 52-weeks. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, two-arm, multi-center, randomized controlled trial in NZ with 378 (target 308) overweight and obese men aged 30-65 years, randomized to an intervention group or wait-list control group. The 12-week RUFIT-NZ program was a gender-sensitised, healthy lifestyle intervention delivered through professional rugby clubs. Each intervention session included: i) a 1-h workshop-based education component focused on nutrition, physical activity, sleep, sedentary behavior, and learning evidence-based behavior change strategies for sustaining a healthier lifestyle; and 2) a 1-h group-based, but individually tailored, exercise training session. The control group were offered RUFIT-NZ after 52-weeks. The primary outcome was change in body weight from baseline to 52-weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in body weight at 12-weeks, waist circumference, blood pressure, fitness (cardiorespiratory and musculoskeletal), lifestyle behaviors (leisure-time physical activity, sleep, smoking status, and alcohol and dietary quality), and health-related quality of life at 12- and 52-weeks. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 200 participants (intervention n = 103; control n = 97) who were able to complete the RUFIT-NZ intervention prior to COVID-19 restrictions. At 52-weeks, the adjusted mean group difference in weight change (primary outcome) was -2.77 kg (95% CI -4.92 to -0.61), which favored the intervention group. The intervention also resulted in favorable significant differences in weight change and fruit and vegetable consumption at 12-weeks; and waist circumference, fitness outcomes, physical activity levels, and health-related quality of life at both 12 and 52 weeks. No significant intervention effects were observed for blood pressure, or sleep. Incremental cost-effective ratios estimated were $259 per kg lost, or $40,269 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. CONCLUSION: RUFIT-NZ resulted in sustained positive changes in weight, waist circumference, physical fitness, self-reported physical activity, selected dietary outcomes, and health-related quality of life in overweight/obese men. As such, the program should be recommended for sustained delivery beyond this trial, involving other rugby clubs across NZ. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619000069156. Registered 18 January 2019, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376740 Universal Trial Number, U1111-1245-0645.

Negotiation of collective and individual candidacy for long Covid healthcare in the early phases of the Covid-19 pandemic: Validated, diverted and rejected candidacy.

This analysis of people's accounts of establishing their need and experiences of healthcare for long Covid (LC) symptoms draws on interview data from five countries (UK, US, Netherlands, Canada, Australia) during the first ∼18 months of the Covid-19 pandemic when LC was an emerging, sometimes contested, condition with scant scientific or lay knowledge to guide patients and professionals in their sense-making of often bewildering constellations of symptoms. We extend the construct of candidacy to explore positive and (more often) negative experiences that patients reported in their quest to understand their symptoms and seek appropriate care. Candidacy usually considers how individuals negotiate healthcare access. We argue a crucial step preceding individual claims to candidacy is recognition of their condition through generation of collective candidacy. "Vanguard patients" collectively identified, named and fought for recognition of long Covid in the context of limited scientific knowledge and no established treatment pathways. This process was technologically accelerated via social media use. Patients commonly experienced "rejected" candidacy (feeling disbelieved, discounted/uncounted and abandoned, and that their suffering was invisible to the medical gaze and society). Patients who felt their candidacy was "validated" had more positive experiences; they appreciated being believed and recognition of their changed lives/bodies and uncertain futures. More positive healthcare encounters were described as a process of "co-experting" through which patient and healthcare professional collaborated in a joint quest towards a pathway to recovery. The findings underpin the importance of believing and learning from patient experience, particularly vanguard patients with new and emerging illnesses.

Attending sporting mega events during COVID-19: mitigation and messaging at UK EURO 2020 matches.

The UEFA EURO 2020 football tournament was one of the largest Sporting Mega Events (SMEs) to take place during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mitigating the risk of virus transmission requires a multi-layered approach for any large event, more so in this case due to staging the tournament across eleven host countries. Yet, little is known about COVID-19 risks and mitigation from attending an event of this scale and nature. We examined the implementation of mitigation and messaging at EURO 2020 matches hosted at venues in the UK. The tournament was postponed from the summer of 2020 and played in June and July of 2021. Structured observations were conducted by 11 trained fieldwork-supporters at 10 matches played at Wembley Stadium, London, or Hampden Park, Glasgow. Fieldwork-supporters observed one-way systems and signage, and hand sanitizing stations inside the stadia, but reported significant variation in the implementation of staggered timeslots, testing upon entry, and procedures for exit. Adherence to planned measures by ticket holders and implementation by stewards waned as the tournament progressed culminating in an absence of enforced measures at the final. The non-compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures was likely to have led to a significantly increased risk of transmission. Future events should consider how COVID-19 mitigation measures could become 'new norms' of fan behaviour, learning from what is already known about football fandom. Tournament organizers of SMEs can use these findings to promote clearer messaging on pandemic-driven changes in fan behaviour and best practices in mitigating risk at future sporting and cultural events.

The UEFA EURO 2020 football tournament saw one of the largest returns to spectating at sporting events during the COVID-19 pandemic. With the tournament taking place across 11 different countries, several measures (e.g. mask-wearing and social distancing) were put in place to protect ticket holders from spreading and catching COVID-19, and these were communicated to spectators before and during matches. This study considers how these measures were implemented at EURO 2020 matches hosted in the UK. Despite retaining the name 'EURO 2020', the tournament was postponed from the summer of 2020 and played in June and July of 2021. We recruited and trained 11 ticket holders who became observers at 10 matches played at Wembley Stadium, London, or Hampden Park, Glasgow. The results demonstrate that supporting normally at football matches during the pandemic times increased the risk of virus transmission. There were inconsistencies in how mitigation measures were planned and implemented by tournament organizers. Ticket holders were also less compliant with mitigation measures as the tournament progressed, likely made more difficult with relaxations in government restrictions. To limit virus transmission at future sporting and cultural events, messaging on mitigation measures must be clear, consistent and implemented as planned.

Negotiation of collective and individual candidacy for long Covid healthcare in the early phases of the Covid-19 pandemic: Validated, diverted and rejected candidacy

This analysis of people's accounts of establishing their need and experiences of healthcare for long Covid (LC) symptoms draws on interview data from five countries (UK, US, Netherlands, Canada, Australia) during the first ∼18 months of the Covid-19 pandemic when LC was an emerging, sometimes contested, condition with scant scientific or lay knowledge to guide patients and professionals in their sense-making of often bewildering constellations of symptoms. We extend the construct of candidacy to explore positive and (more often) negative experiences that patients reported in their quest to understand their symptoms and seek appropriate care. Candidacy usually considers how individuals negotiate healthcare access. We argue a crucial step preceding individual claims to candidacy is recognition of their condition through generation of collective candidacy. “Vanguard patients” collectively identified, named and fought for recognition of long Covid in the context of limited scientific knowledge and no established treatment pathways. This process was technologically accelerated via social media use. Patients commonly experienced “rejected” candidacy(feeling disbelieved, discounted/uncounted and abandoned, and that their suffering was invisible to the medical gaze and society). Patients who felt their candidacy was “validated” had more positive experiences;they appreciated being believed and recognition of their changed lives/bodies and uncertain futures. More positive healthcare encounters were described as a process of “co-experting” through which patient and healthcare professional collaborated in a joint quest towards a pathway to recovery. The findings underpin the importance of believing and learning from patient experience, particularly vanguard patients with new and emerging illnesses.

Expenditure on Paid-for Gambling Advertising During the National COVID-19 'Lockdowns': An Observational Study of Media Monitoring Data from the United Kingdom.

Changes in gambling advertising during national COVID-19 'lockdowns', when stay-at-home rules restricted participation in certain gambling activities, provides important context to variance in gambling behaviour during these periods. This study describes expenditure on paid-for gambling advertising during three national lockdowns, compares expenditure to pre-pandemic estimates, and compares changes in expenditure by subsector. Data come from an observational study of weekly expenditure on paid-for gambling advertising in the United Kingdom (n = 135 weeks; beginning 2019 to mid-2021), focusing on three COVID-19 lockdowns: (1) March-May 2020; (2) November-December 2020; and (3) January-March 2021. We descriptively analysed how total advertising expenditure in each lockdown (£GBP, inflation-adjusted) compared to the same time points in 2019, both overall and by subsector (bookmakers, lotteries, online bingo, online casino and poker, gaming, pools, mobile content). Gambling advertising expenditure during lockdown one was 38.5% lower than 2019 (£43.5 million[m] vs. £70.7 m, respectively), with decreases across all subsectors (range: -81.7% [bookmakers] to -2.8% [online bingo]). Total advertising expenditure in lockdown two was 49.3% higher than 2019 (£51.7 m vs. £34.6 m), with increases for 5/7 subsectors (range: -31.6% [mobile content] to + 103.8% [bookmakers]). In lockdown three, advertising expenditure was 5.9% higher than 2019 (£91.2 m vs. £86.1 m), with increases for 4/7 subsectors (range: -92.4% [pools] to + 49.2% [mobile content]). Reductions in advertising expenditure in lockdown one are congruent with self-reported reductions in overall gambling also observed during this period. Further research is needed to determine whether increased advertising expenditure in lockdowns two and three correlates with increased gambling, overall and for specific subsectors.

A "step too far" or "perfect sense"? A qualitative study of British adults' views on mandating COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine passports.

BACKGROUND: Debate is ongoing about mandating COVID-19 vaccination to maximise uptake. Policymakers must consider whether to mandate, for how long, and in which contexts, taking into account not only legal and ethical questions but also public opinion. Implementing mandates among populations who oppose them could be counterproductive. METHODS: Qualitative telephone interviews (Feb-May 2021) with British adults explored views on vaccine passports and mandatory vaccination. Participants (n = 50) were purposively selected from respondents to a probability-based national survey of attitudes to COVID-19 vaccination, to include those expressing vaccine-hesitancy. Data were analysed thematically. FINDINGS: Six themes were identified in participants' narratives concerning mandates: (i) mandates are a necessary and proportionate response for some occupations to protect the vulnerable and facilitate the resumption of free movement; (ii) mandates undermine autonomy and choice; (iii) mandates represent an over-reach of state power; (iv) mandates could potentially create 'vaccine apartheid'; (v) the importance of context and framing; and (vi) mandates present considerable feasibility challenges. Those refusing vaccination tended to argue strongly against mandates. However, those in favour of vaccination also expressed concerns about freedom of choice, state coercion and social divisiveness. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first in-depth UK study of public views on COVID-19 vaccine mandates. It does not assess support for different mandates but explores emotions, principles and reasoning underpinning views. Our data suggest that debate around mandates can arouse strong concerns and could entrench scepticism. Policymakers should proceed with caution. While surveys can provide snapshots of opinion on mandates, views are complex and further consultation is needed regarding specific scenarios.

National survey of attitudes towards and intentions to vaccinate against COVID-19: implications for communications.

OBJECTIVES: To examine public views on COVID-19 vaccination and consider the implications for communications and targeted support. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Online and telephone nationally representative survey in Great Britain, January to February 2021. PARTICIPANTS: 4978 adults. Survey response rate was 84%, among the 5931 panellists invited. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, education, financial status), COVID-19 status, vaccine acceptance, trust in COVID-19 vaccination information sources, perceptions of vaccination priority groups and perceptions of importance of second dose. RESULTS: COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (83%) was associated with increasing age, higher level of education and having been invited for vaccination. Acceptance decreased with unconfirmed past COVID-19, greater financial hardship and non-white British ethnicity; black/black British participants had lowest acceptance. Overall, healthcare and scientific sources of information were most trusted. Compared with white British participants, other ethnicities had lower trust in healthcare and scientific sources. Those with lower educational attainment or financial hardship had lower trust in healthcare and scientific sources. Those with no qualifications had higher trust in media and family/friends. While trust was low overall in community or faith leaders, it was higher among those with Asian/Asian British and black/black British ethnicity compared with white British participants. Views of vaccine prioritisation were mostly consistent with UK official policy but there was support for prioritising additional groups. There was high support for having the second vaccine dose. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted engagement is needed to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in non-white British ethnic groups, in younger adults, and among those with lower education, greater financial hardship and unconfirmed past infection. Healthcare professionals and scientific advisors should play a central role in communications and tailored messaging is needed for hesitant groups. Careful communication around vaccination prioritisation continues to be required.

Rehabilitation and In-Hospital Mortality in COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) guidelines endorse early rehabilitation to improve outcomes in hospitalized patients, but the evidence base to support this recommendation is lacking. We examined the association between early rehabilitation and in-hospital deaths in COVID-19 patients. METHOD: A single-center retrospective study, involving 990 COVID-19 patients (42.4% women, mean age 67.8 years) admitted between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 to a community hospital, was conducted. Association of rehabilitation during hospitalization with in-hospital mortality was examined using logistic regression analysis adjusted for demographics, length of stay, body mass index, comorbid illnesses, functional status as well as for COVID-19 presentations, treatments, and complications. RESULTS: Over the 3-month study period, 475 (48.0%) inpatients were referred for rehabilitation. Patients who received rehabilitation were older (73.7 ± 14.0 vs 62.3 ± 17.2). There were 61 hospital deaths (12.8%) in the rehabilitation group and 165 (32.0%) in the nonrehabilitation group. Receiving rehabilitation was associated with an 89% lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06-0.19) after adjusting for multiple confounders and COVID-19 disease markers. In sensitivity analyses, the results were significant in subpopulations defined by age group, sex, race, length of hospitalization, or pulmonary presentations. Each additional rehabilitation session was associated with a 29% lower risk of in-hospital mortality (OR per session: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.64-0.79) in the fully adjusted model. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, receiving early rehabilitation was associated with lower in-hospital mortality. Our findings support implementation of rehabilitation services for COVID-19 patients in acute care settings, but further research from randomized clinical trials is needed.

How the design and nature of gambling marketing affects consumers: findings from a content analysis of advertising and in-depth interviews with sports bettors and young people during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom

BackgroundGambling advertising often contains a multitude of information about inducements and incentives, in addition to details of the specific gambling product marketed and other promotional features. Research suggests that consumers are more likely to misjudge the likelihood of winning or benefiting as the complexity of the gambling product offered increases. As part of a larger study concerning the impact of COVID-19 on gambling behaviours and marketing, we explored how gambling products and inducements are marketed in the United Kingdom (UK) and how inducements are received, and perceived, by gamblers.MethodsTwo data sources are synthesised from the ‘Betting and Gaming COVID-19 Impact Study’. An in-depth content analysis was conducted on a stratified random sample of gambling adverts (n=200) from seven media activities in UK (March-May 2020). Coding captured information about the gamble promoted (e.g. suggested odds and wagers), inducements (e.g. new customer offers, free bets), and how Terms and Conditions (T&Cs) were communicated. In-depth telephone interviews were conducted (July-November 2020) with sports bettors (n=16) and young adults (n=11) in the UK to explore experiences and practices related to gambling. Data were analysed thematically using the framework method.ResultsGambling adverts routinely featured complex information about the gambling products promoted and associated inducements. The design of adverts appeared carefully curated so that promotional and branding aspects had greater prominence than practical information about how inducements operated and eligibility to participate and benefit, if such T&Cs appeared at all. In the interviews, participants perceived gambling advertising to be ubiquitous. While several participants underplayed the influence that gambling advertising and marketing had on their gambling activity, some explicitly said that the content had a negative impact on their gambling, including the adoption of novel and potentially ‘riskier’ gambling behaviours (e.g. online casino games). A few highlighted a lack of transparency in relation to T&Cs underpinning inducements offered by gambling operators, which, in turn, compounded adverse gambling experiences.ConclusionThe way that gambling products and inducements are marketed in the UK is complex and likely to challenge comprehension by consumers. Bettors routinely recall awareness of, and engagement with, a variety of gambling marketing activities, and highlight concerns about the reach and impact that marketing may have, particularly on vulnerable groups such as young people and problem gamblers.

The impact of the initial Covid-19 lockdown upon regular sports bettors in Britain: Findings from a cross-sectional online study.

BACKGROUND: In Britain, unprecedented restrictions on daily life associated with the Covid-19 pandemic included the suspension of professional sports events during the initial 'lockdown'. This provides opportunities to observe changes in sports bettors' behaviour when their primary form of activity is removed and assess the impact of Covid-19 related circumstances upon gambling. METHODS: In July 2020, we conducted an online cross-sectional survey of people who bet regularly (at least monthly) on sports before Covid-19 (n = 3866). Bi-variate analyses compared changes in gambling behaviours before and during the initial lockdown. Multi-variate logistic regression models explored associations between problem gambling (men) and moderate risk or problem gambling (MRPG) (women) with changes in Covid-19 related circumstances and changing gambling behaviours during Britain's initial 'lockdown' (March-June 2020). RESULTS: 29.8% of male sports bettors and 33.4% of female sports bettors stopped gambling altogether during the initial Covid-19 lockdown, though 17.3% of men and 16.5% of women started a new form of gambling during lockdown. Among men, adjusted odds ratios of problem gambling were higher among those starting a new gambling activity during lockdown (OR = 2.50 [95% CI 1.38-4.53]). Among women, adjusted odds ratios of MRPG were higher among those whose frequency of gambling on any activity increased during lockdown (OR = 4.21 [1.99-8.92] and among those shielding for health reasons. Poorer wellbeing was associated with problem gambling for men and MRPG for women. CONCLUSIONS: Those changing gambling behaviours during the initial Covid-19 lockdown (e.g. increasing gambling frequency or starting a new gambling activity) are potentially vulnerable to gambling harms.

Protocol for a Mixed-Method Investigation of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Gambling Practices, Experiences and Marketing in the UK: The "Betting and Gaming COVID-19 Impact Study".

The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented restrictions on people's movements and interactions, as well as the cancellation of major sports events and social activities, directly altering the gambling landscape. There is urgent need to provide regulators, policy makers and treatment providers with evidence on the patterns and context of gambling during COVID-19 and its aftermath. This protocol describes a study addressing the following three questions: (1) How has COVID-19 changed gambling practices and the risk factors for, and experience of, gambling harms? (2) What is the effect of COVID-19 on gambling marketing? (3) How has COVID-19 changed high risk groups' gambling experiences and practices? This mixed-method study focuses on two groups, namely young adults and sports bettors. In workpackage-1, we will extend an existing longitudinal survey of gambling in young adults (aged 16-24 years) (first wave conducted June-August 2019), adding COVID-19-related questions to the second wave (July-August 2020) and extending to a third wave in 2021; and undertake a survey of sports bettors in the UK (baseline n = 4000, ~July-August 2020), with follow-ups in ~October-November 2020 and ~February-March 2021. In workpackage-2, we will examine changes in expenditure on paid-for gambling advertising from January 2019 to July 2021 and undertake a mixed-method content analysis of a random sample of paid-for gambling advertising (n ~ 200) and social media marketing (n ~ 100) during the initial COVID-19 "lockdown". Workpackage-3 will involve qualitative interviews with a purposive sample of (a) young adults (aged 18-24 years) and (b) sports bettors.