Are there inequalities in the attendance and effectiveness of behavioural weight management interventions for adults in the UK? Protocol for an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: It is important to identify whether behavioural weight management interventions work well across different groups in the population so health inequalities in obesity are not widened. Previous systematic reviews of inequalities in the attendance and effectiveness of behavioural weight management interventions have been limited because few trials report relevant analyses and heterogeneity in the categorisation of inequality characteristics prevents meta-analysis. An individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) allows us to reanalyse all trials with available data in a uniform way. We aim to conduct an IPD meta-analysis of UK randomised controlled trials to examine whether there are inequalities in the attendance and effectiveness of behavioural weight interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In a recently published systematic review, we identified 17 UK-based randomised controlled trials of primary care-relevant behavioural interventions, conducted in adults living with overweight or obesity and reporting weight outcomes at baseline and 1-year follow-up. The corresponding author of each trial will be invited to contribute data to the IPD-MA. The outcomes of interest are weight at 12-months and intervention attendance (number of sessions offered vs number of sessions attended). We will primarily consider whether there is an interaction between intervention group and characteristics where inequalities occur, such as by gender/sex, socioeconomic status or age. The IPD-MA will be conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of IPD guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No further ethical approval was required as ethical approval for each individual study was obtained by the original trial investigators from appropriate ethics committees. The completed IPD-MA will be disseminated at conferences, in a peer-reviewed journal and contribute to the lead author's PhD thesis. Investigators of each individual study included in the final IPD-MA will be invited to collaborate on any publications that arise from the project.

Association between Indicators of Inequality and Weight Change following a Behavioural Weight Loss Intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Weight loss through behavioural weight management interventions can have important health benefits for people with obesity. However, to maximise the health benefits, weight loss must be maintained. Evidence suggests that behavioural weight loss interventions do not exacerbate inequalities in the short term. However, no study has yet considered whether inequalities exist in long-term weight change following intervention. We aimed to investigate if there are inequalities in weight change following weight loss intervention. METHODS: We conducted a cohort analysis of data from the Weight Loss Referrals for Adults in Primary Care (WRAP) trial (N = 1,267). WRAP randomised participants to receive a brief intervention information booklet or vouchers for 12-weeks or 52-weeks of WW (formerly WeightWatchers) and followed them for 5 years. Multiple linear regression estimated the association between exposures (indicators of inequality) and outcomes (change in weight between 1- and 5-years). Each model was adjusted for the intervention group, baseline weight, weight change between baseline and 1-year, research centre, and source of the 5-year weight data. RESULTS: Of the 1,267 participants in WRAP, 708 had weight change data available. Mean weight change between 1- and 5-years was +3.30 kg (SD 9.10 kg). A 1 year difference in age at baseline was associated with weight change of 0.11 kg ((95% CI 0.06, 0.16), p < 0.001). We did not find evidence of associations between ethnicity, gender, education, indices of multiple deprivation, household income, or other family members participating in a weight loss programme and weight change. CONCLUSION: Except for age, we did not find evidence of inequalities in weight change following a behavioural intervention. Findings further support the use of behavioural weight management interventions as part of a systems-wide approach to improving population health.

What Works to Improve Wellbeing? A Rapid Systematic Review of 223 Interventions Evaluated with the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scales.

INTRODUCTION: The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) is a commonly used scale of mental wellbeing focusing entirely on the positive aspect of mental health. It has been widely used in a broad range of clinical and research settings, including to evaluate if interventions, programmes or pilots improve wellbeing. We aimed to systematically review all interventions that used WEMWBS and evaluate which interventions are the most effective at improving wellbeing. METHODS: Eligible populations included children and adults, with no health or age restrictions. Any intervention study was eligible if the wellbeing outcome was measured using the 7 or 14-item WEMWBS scale assessed both pre- and post-intervention. We identified eligible intervention studies using three approaches: a database search (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PyschInfo and Web of Science from January 2007 to present), grey literature search, and by issuing a call for evidence. Narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analysis of standardised mean differences in the intervention group were used to summarise intervention effects on WEMWBS score. RESULTS: We identified 223 interventions across 209 studies, with a total of 53,834 participants across all studies. Five main themes of interventions were synthesised: psychological (n = 80); social (n = 54); arts, culture and environment (n = 29); physical health promotion (n = 18); and other (n = 28). Psychological interventions based on resilience, wellbeing or self-management techniques had the strongest effect on wellbeing. A broad range of other interventions were effective at improving mental wellbeing, including other psychological interventions such as cognitive behavioural therapy, psychoeducation and mindfulness. Medium to strong effects were also seen for person-centred support/advice (social), arts-based, parenting (social) and social prescribing interventions. However, a major limitation of the evidence was that only 75 (36%) of studies included a control group. CONCLUSIONS: WEMWBS has been widely used to assess wellbeing across a diverse range of interventions, settings and samples. Despite substantial heterogeneity in individual intervention design, delivery and groups targeted, results indicate that a broad range of intervention types can successfully improve wellbeing. Methodological changes, such as greater use of control groups in intervention evaluation, can help future researchers and policy makers further understand what works for mental wellbeing.

A systematic review of inequalities in the uptake of, adherence to, and effectiveness of behavioral weight management interventions in adults.

The extent to which behavioral weight management interventions affect health inequalities is uncertain, as is whether trials of these interventions directly consider inequalities. We conducted a systematic review, synthesizing evidence on how different aspects of inequality impact uptake, adherence, and effectiveness in trials of behavioral weight management interventions. We included (cluster-) randomized controlled trials of primary care-applicable behavioral weight management interventions in adults with overweight or obesity published prior to March 2020. Data about trial uptake, intervention adherence, attrition, and weight change by PROGRESS-Plus criteria (place of residence, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender, religion, education, socioeconomic status, social capital, plus other discriminating factors) were extracted. Data were synthesized narratively and summarized in harvest plots. We identified 91 behavioral weight loss interventions and 12 behavioral weight loss maintenance interventions. Fifty-six of the 103 trials considered inequalities in relation to at least one of intervention or trial uptake (n = 15), intervention adherence (n = 15), trial attrition (n = 32), or weight outcome (n = 34). Most trials found no inequalities gradient. If a gradient was observed for trial uptake, intervention adherence, and trial attrition, those considered "more advantaged" did best. Alternative methods of data synthesis that enable data to be pooled and increase statistical power may enhance understanding of inequalities in behavioral weight management interventions.

A systematic review examining socioeconomic factors in trials of interventions for men that report weight as an outcome.

Weight management interventions designed specifically for men have become more common, but the extent to which socioeconomic factors are considered in trials of these interventions is unclear. We synthesized study characteristics, methods, and reporting of interventions with a behavioral component for men that report weight as an outcome, to establish the extent to which socioeconomic factors are considered during intervention design, conduct, and reporting. A comprehensive search was conducted on Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL for studies published from January 2000 to July 2021. Thirty-six trials were included. Educational attainment (n = 24) was the most frequently reported socioeconomic characteristic, followed by working status (n = 14) and area level deprivation (n = 12). Seven studies did not report any socioeconomic characteristics. Most studies (n = 20) did not mention the socioeconomic profile of their samples in relation to study strengths or limitations. Few (n = 4) consulted with men from lower socioeconomic groups during intervention design. One study examined potential differential intervention effects across socioeconomic groups, with most not powered to do so. Recent feasibility trials (n = 3) targeting specific socioeconomic groups suggest a potential nascent towards a greater consideration of factors related to equity. To best inform public health policy related to health inequalities, greater consideration of socioeconomic factors is required in trials of men's weight management interventions.

Association between patient activation, self-management behaviours and clinical outcomes in adults with diabetes or related metabolic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes and related metabolic disorders such as obesity and cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are a growing global issue. Equipping individuals with the necessary 'knowledge, skills and confidence to self-manage their health' (ie, patient activation (PAct)) may lead to improvements in health outcomes. It is unclear whether existing evidence allows us to assume a causal relationship. We aim to synthesise and critically appraise evidence on the relationship between PAct and self-management behaviours and clinical outcomes of people living with diabetes and related metabolic disorders. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol is based on guidance on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols. We will search Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycInfo, Web of Science and CINAHL using search terms related to PAct, diabetes, pre-diabetes, obesity and CVD. Any quantitative study design is eligible provided studies assess the association between PAct and clinical outcomes and/or self-management behaviours of diabetes and related metabolic disorders. Outcomes include behavioural (eg, diet) and clinical (eg, blood pressure) outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen titles/abstracts and full texts and assess risk of bias using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials or the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomised Studies (RoBANS).One reviewer will extract data, with independent checking by a second reviewer. We will critically assess the level of evidence available for assuming a causal association between PAct and outcomes. Data permitting, we will use the Hunter-Schmidt random-effects method to meta-analyse correlations across studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. The review will be disseminated in the form of a peer-reviewed journal article, at conferences and other presentations. The findings of the review will be of interest to clinical commissioning groups, policymakers and intervention deliverers/developers. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021230727.

A Systematic Scoping Review of the Impacts of Community Food Production Initiatives in Kenya, Cameroon, and South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, one in two people in Africa were food insecure. The burden of malnutrition remains high (e.g. childhood stunting, anaemia in women of reproductive age) or are increasing (e.g. overweight and obesity). A range of coordinated actions are required to improve this situation, including increasing local food production and consumption. The aim of this review was to provide a systematic and comprehensive overview of recently published research into the health, social, economic, and environmental impacts of community food production initiatives (CFPIs) in Kenya, Cameroon and South Africa. METHODS: We searched eight electronic databases covering health, social, environmental, economic and agricultural sciences. Primary research studies published from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2018 were considered. Data on geographic location, study design, type of CFPI and the impacts assessed were abstracted from eligible articles. FINDINGS: We identified 4828 articles, 260 of which required full-text review and 118 met our eligibility criteria. Most research was conducted in Kenya (53.4%) and South Africa (38.1%). The categories of CFPIs studied were (in order of decreasing frequency): crop farming, livestock farming, unspecified farming, fisheries, home / school gardens, urban agriculture, and agroforestry. The largest number of studies were on the economic and environmental impacts of CFPIs, followed by their health and social impacts. The health impacts investigated included food security, nutrition status and dietary intake. One study investigated the potential impact of CFPIs on non-communicable diseases. Over 60% of studies investigated a single category of impact. Not one of the studies explicitly used a theoretical framework to guide its design or interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings on research studies of CFPIs suggest the need for a greater focus on interdisciplinary research in order to improve understanding of the relationships between their health, environmental, economic, and social impacts. Greater use of explicit theoretical frameworks could assist in research design and interpretation, helping to ensure its relevance to informing coordinated intersectoral interventions and policy initiatives.

The Frequency and Content of Discussions About Alcohol Use in Primary Care and Application of the Chief Medical Officer's Low-Risk Drinking Guidelines: A Cross-Sectional Survey of General Practitioners and Practice Nurses in the UK.

AIMS: To examine how often general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) working in primary care discuss alcohol with patients, what factors prompt discussions, how they approach patient discussions and whether the Chief Medical Officers' (CMO) revised low-risk drinking guidelines are appropriately advised. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey with GPs and PNs working in primary care in the UK, conducted January-March 2017 (n = 2020). A vignette exercise examined what factors would prompt a discussion about alcohol, whether they would discuss before or after a patient reported exceeded the revised CMO guidelines (14 units per week) and whether the CMO drinking guidelines were appropriately advised. For all patients, participants were asked how often they discussed alcohol and how they approached the discussion (e.g. used screening tool). RESULTS: The most common prompts to discuss alcohol in the vignette exercise were physical cues (44.7% of participants) or alcohol-related symptoms (23.8%). Most practitioners (70.1%) said they would wait until a patient was exceeding CMO guidelines before instigating discussion. Two-fifths (38.1%) appropriately advised the CMO guidelines in the vignette exercise, with PNs less likely to do so than GPs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.77, P = 0.03). Less than half (44.7%) reportedly asked about alcohol always/often with all patients, with PNs more likely to ask always/often than GPs (OR = 2.22, P < 0.001). Almost three-quarters said they would enquire by asking about units (70.3%), compared to using screening tools. CONCLUSION: Further research is required to identify mechanisms to increase the frequency of discussions about alcohol and appropriate recommendation of the CMO drinking guidelines to patients.

The impact of adult behavioural weight management interventions on mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is good evidence that behavioural weight management interventions improve physical health; however, the impact on mental health remains unclear. We evaluated the impact of behavioural weight management interventions on mental health-related outcomes in adults with overweight or obesity at intervention-end and 12 months from baseline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster RCTs of adult behavioural weight loss interventions reporting affect, anxiety, binge eating, body image, depression, emotional eating, quality of life, self-esteem and stress. We searched seven databases from inception to 7 May 2019 and included 43 articles reporting 42 RCTs. Eighteen studies were deemed to be at high risk of bias. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses, stratified analyses and meta-regression using Stata. Interventions generated greater improvements than comparators for depression, mental health-related quality of life and self-efficacy at intervention-end and 12 months from baseline. There was no difference between groups for anxiety, overall quality of life, self-esteem or stress at intervention-end. There was insufficient evidence to assess the impact on anxiety, binge eating, body image, emotional eating, affect, life satisfaction, self-esteem or stress at intervention-end and/or 12 months from baseline. Although evidence suggests that interventions benefit some aspects of mental health, high-quality, transparently reported RCTs measuring a range of mental health outcomes over longer durations are required to strengthen the evidence base.