A mixed methods analysis of existing assessment and evaluation tools (AETs) for mental health applications.

Introduction: Mental health Applications (MH Apps) can potentially improve access to high-quality mental health care. However, the recent rapid expansion of MH Apps has created growing concern regarding their safety and effectiveness, leading to the development of AETs (Assessment and Evaluation Tools) to help guide users. This article provides a critical, mixed methods analysis of existing AETs for MH Apps by reviewing the criteria used to evaluate MH Apps and assessing their effectiveness as evaluation tools. Methods: To identify relevant AETs, gray and scholarly literature were located through stakeholder consultation, Internet searching via Google and a literature search of bibliographic databases Medline, APA PsycInfo, and LISTA. Materials in English that provided a tool or method to evaluate MH Apps and were published from January 1, 2000, to January 26, 2021 were considered for inclusion. Results: Thirteen relevant AETs targeted for MH Apps met the inclusion criteria. The qualitative analysis of AETs and their evaluation criteria revealed that despite purporting to focus on MH Apps, the included AETs did not contain criteria that made them more specific to MH Apps than general health applications. There appeared to be very little agreed-upon terminology in this field, and the focus of selection criteria in AETs is often IT-related, with a lesser focus on clinical issues, equity, and scientific evidence. The quality of AETs was quantitatively assessed using the AGREE II, a standardized tool for evaluating assessment guidelines. Three out of 13 AETs were deemed 'recommended' using the AGREE II. Discussion: There is a need for further improvements to existing AETs. To realize the full potential of MH Apps and reduce stakeholders' concerns, AETs must be developed within the current laws and governmental health policies, be specific to mental health, be feasible to implement and be supported by rigorous research methodology, medical education, and public awareness.

Stakeholders' views and opinions on existing guidelines on "How to Choose Mental Health Apps".

Background: Mental health Applications (Mhealth Apps) can change how healthcare is delivered. However, very little is known about the efficacy of Mhealth Apps. Currently, only minimum guidance is available in Assessment and Evaluation Tools (AETs). Therefore, this project aims to understand AET developers' perspectives and end users' experiences and opinions on "how to choose a Mhealth App". Objective: The primary objectives were: (1) obtaining stakeholder's opinions and experiences of development and use of AETs for Mhealth Apps, their weaknesses and strengths, and barriers in their implementation of Mhealth Apps; (2) the experiences of App users, their analyzation and, obstacles in the use of apps; and (3) to quantify themes related to choosing a Mhealth App. Methods: This qualitative study, used a sampling method to recruit six stakeholders (one App developer, two AET developers, an individual with lived experience of mental health illness, and two physicians) who were interviewed using a topic guide. These were examined by researchers (CT, WK, & FN) using thematic content analysis. Additionally, an anonymous online survey of 107 individuals was conducted. Findings: Our analyses revealed six main themes: (a) needs and opportunities; (b) views on Mhealth apps; (c) views & opinions on AETs; (d) implementation barriers; (e) system of evaluation and; (f) future directions. The first key concept was, all stakeholders agreed that Apps could significantly impact mental health and that end-users were unaware of mental health AETs and Apps. Secondly, due to commercial interests, end-users reliability of App evaluations requires clear conflict-free guidelines. Thirdly, AETs should be evaluated and developed through a rigorous methodology. Finally, stakeholders shared insights into future developments for AETs and Mhealth Apps. Additionally, online survey respondents chose a "health professional" as their preferred source of guidance in selecting a Mhealth app (84%) and best suited to develop guidelines (70%). Conclusion: The interviews and survey highlight the need for Mhealth Apps to be regulated and the importance of health professionals' engagement in the implementation process. Similarly, without well-defined roles for App evaluations within the health care system, it is unlikely that AETs will have wider spread use and impact without risk.

Protocol for a multi-phase, mixed methods study to develop and evaluate culturally adapted CBT to improve community mental health services for Canadians of south Asian origin.

BACKGROUND: Canadians of South Asian (SA) origin comprise the largest racialized group in Canada, representing 25.6% of what Statistics Canada terms "visible minority populations". South Asian Canadians are disproportionately impacted by the social determinants of health, and this can result in high rates of mood and anxiety disorders. These factors can negatively impact mental health and decrease access to care, thereby increasing mental health inequities. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) in its current form is not suitable for persons from the non-western cultural backgrounds. Culturally adapted Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CaCBT) is an evidence-based practice. CaCBT is more effective than standard CBT and can reduce dropouts from therapy compared with standard CBT. Thus, CaCBT can increase access to mental health services and improve outcomes for immigrant, refugee and ethno-cultural and racialized populations. Adapting CBT for growing SA populations in Canada will ensure equitable access to effective and culturally appropriate interventions. METHODS: The primary aim of the study is to develop and evaluate CaCBT for Canadian South Asian persons with depression and anxiety and to gather data from stakeholders to develop guidelines to culturally adapt CBT. This mixed methods study will use three phases: (1) cultural adaptation of CBT, (2) pilot feasibility of CaCBT and (3) implementation and evaluation of CaCBT. Phase 1 will use purposive sampling to recruit individuals from four different groups: (1) SA patients with depression and anxiety, (b) caregivers and family members of individuals affected by anxiety and depression, (c) mental health professionals and (d) SA community opinion leaders. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted virtually and analysis of interviews will be informed by an ethnographic approach. Phase 2 will pilot test the newly developed CaCBT for feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness via quantitative methodology and a randomized controlled trial, including an economic analysis. Phase 3 will recruit therapists to train and evaluate them in the new CaCBT. DISCUSSION: The outcome of this trial will benefit health services in Canada, in terms of helping to reduce the burden of depression and anxiety and provide better care for South Asians. We expect the results to help guide the development of better services and tailor existing services to the needs of other vulnerable groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04010890. Registered on July 8, 2019.

Quantification of Viral and Host Biomarkers in the Liver of Rhesus Macaques: A Longitudinal Study of Zaire Ebolavirus Strain Kikwit (EBOV/Kik).

Zaire ebolavirus (EBOV) causes Ebola virus disease (EVD), which carries a fatality rate between 25% and 90% in humans. Liver pathology is a hallmark of terminal EVD; however, little is known about temporal disease progression. We used multiplexed fluorescent immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization in combination with whole slide imaging and image analysis (IA) to quantitatively characterize temporospatial signatures of viral and host factors as related to EBOV pathogenesis. Eighteen rhesus monkeys euthanized between 3 and 8 days post-infection, and 3 uninfected controls were enrolled in this study. Compared with semiquantitative histomorphologic ordinal scoring, quantitative IA detected subtle and progressive features of early and terminal EVD that was not feasible with routine approaches. Sinusoidal macrophages were the earliest cells to respond to infection, expressing proinflammatory cytokine interleukin 6 (IL6) mRNA, which was subsequently also observed in fibrovascular compartments. The mRNA of interferon-stimulated gene-15 (ISG-15), also known as ISG15 ubiquitin like modifier (ISG15), was observed early, with a progressive and ubiquitous hybridization signature involving mesenchymal and epithelial compartments. ISG-15 mRNA was prominent near infected cells, but not in infected cells, supporting the hypothesis that bystander cells produce a robust interferon gene response. This study contributes to our current understanding of early EVD progression and illustrates the value that digital pathology and quantitative IA serve in infectious disease research.

Oral rapamycin to inhibit restenosis after stenting of de novo coronary lesions: the Oral Rapamune to Inhibit Restenosis (ORBIT) study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to establish safety and feasibility of oral Rapamycin at two doses-2 mg and 5 mg-in achieving low rates of repeat target lesion revascularization (TLR) in de novo native coronary artery lesions. BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents have shown the ability to limit restenosis. Oral Rapamycin is an alternative strategy that can target multiple coronary lesions suitable for treatment with any approved metal stent and at potentially lower cost. METHODS: The Oral Rapamune to Inhibit Restenosis (ORBIT) study is an open-label study of 60 patients with de novo lesions treated with bare metal stents in up to two vessels. After a loading dose of 5 mg, patients received a daily dose of 2 mg (n = 30) and 5 mg (n = 30) for 30 days. Six-month angiographic, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and clinical follow-up were conducted. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were similar: 10% of patients in the 2-mg group and 30% in the 5-mg group did not complete the course; 43% in the 2-mg group and 66% in the 5-mg group had side effects. At six-month follow-up, late loss (0.6 +/- 0.5 mm vs. 0.7 +/- 0.5 mm; p = NS), in-stent binary restenosis (7.1% vs. 6.9%; p = NS), in-stent percent volume obstruction by IVUS (29% vs. 24%; p = NS), and clinically driven TLR (14.3% vs. 6.9%; p = NS) were similar in 2-mg and 5-mg groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral Rapamycin for the prevention of restenosis is safe, feasible, and associated with low rates of repeat revascularization. Although associated with certain side effects, it may be considered for patients undergoing multivessel stents if proven in larger randomized studies.