The evidence synthesis and meta-analysis in R conference (ESMARConf): levelling the playing field of conference accessibility and equitability.

Rigorous evidence is vital in all disciplines to ensure efficient, appropriate, and fit-for-purpose decision-making with minimised risk of unintended harm. To date, however, disciplines have been slow to share evidence synthesis frameworks, best practices, and tools amongst one another. Recent progress in collaborative digital and programmatic frameworks, such as the free and Open Source software R, have significantly expanded the opportunities for development of free-to-use, incrementally improvable, community driven tools to support evidence synthesis (e.g. EviAtlas, robvis, PRISMA2020 flow diagrams and metadat). Despite this, evidence synthesis (and meta-analysis) practitioners and methodologists who make use of R remain relatively disconnected from one another. Here, we report on a new virtual conference for evidence synthesis and meta-analysis in the R programming environment (ESMARConf) that aims to connect these communities. By designing an entirely free and online conference from scratch, we have been able to focus efforts on maximising accessibility and equity-making these core missions for our new community of practice. As a community of practice, ESMARConf builds on the success and groundwork of the broader R community and systematic review coordinating bodies (e.g. Cochrane), but fills an important niche. ESMARConf aims to maximise accessibility and equity of participants across regions, contexts, and social backgrounds, forging a level playing field in a digital, connected, and online future of evidence synthesis. We believe that everyone should have the same access to participation and involvement, and we believe ESMARConf provides a vital opportunity to push for equitability across disciplines, regions, and personal situations.

Experimental Test of the Educational Impact of the Newly Proposed FDA Graphic Cigarette Warnings Among U.S. Adults.

BACKGROUND: In August 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed a set of 13 new graphic warnings for cigarette packaging and advertisements. PURPOSE: We evaluated these warnings relative to text-only equivalents for their ability to educate the public regarding harms of smoking and influence outcomes associated with quitting. METHODS: In an experimental within-subjects design, U.S. adult nonsmokers, smokers, and dual smoker/electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) users (N = 412) recruited from an online internet platform evaluated the newly proposed graphic warnings and corresponding text-only warnings on understandability, perceived new knowledge, worry elicited about the content of the warning, discouragement from smoking, and encouragement to use e-cigarettes. RESULTS: Graphic warnings were generally rated as providing better understanding, more new knowledge, eliciting more worry about harms of smoking, and providing more discouragement from smoking relative to text-only warnings. CONCLUSIONS: The newly proposed graphic warnings could influence important responses to warnings associated with motivation to reduce smoking.

Beneath the surface: Abstract construal mindset increases receptivity to metaphors in health communications.

Widespread messages use metaphoric language and imagery to prompt recipients to interpret health-related concepts in terms of dissimilar, familiar concepts (e.g., "fight the war on cancer"). When do these messages work? According to Conceptual Metaphor Theory, thinking metaphorically involves looking past concepts' superficial differences to identify their similarities at a structural level. Thus, we hypothesized that when people's general construal mindset is oriented to focus on information's abstract meaning, not its concrete details, they would process a metaphor's target health concept in ways that correspond to the dissimilar concept. Accordingly, after priming an abstract, but not concrete, construal mindset: framing sun exposure as enemy confrontation (vs. literally) increased cancer risk perceptions and sun-safe intentions (Study 1; N=186); and framing smoking cessation as an arduous journey (vs. literally) increased appreciation of quitting difficulties and interest in cessation tools (Study 2; N=244). We discuss practical and theoretical implications for improving health communication.

Evaluation of an intervention promoting emotion regulation skills for adults with persisting distress due to adverse childhood experiences.

This phase II trial evaluated psychosocial and health outcomes of an intervention designed to improve emotion regulation skills in adults suffering from Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs). The study utilized a pretest-posttest design in which 92 adults enrolled in the community-based program completed pretest measures, attended either a faith-based or secular version of the 12-week ACE Overcomers program, and then completed posttest measures. The theory-guided program involved group sessions providing education and skills training to improve emotion regulation, self-awareness, resilience, and social functioning. Pretest and posttest surveys included measures of emotional regulation (suppression, rumination, cognitive reappraisal, and mindfulness), resilience (ego resilience and general self-efficacy), emotional experiences (perceived stress, moods, and depressive symptoms), quality of life (the SF-36 domains), and physical symptoms and illness (symptom load and sick days). Analyses revealed significant improvements from pretest to posttest in all facets of emotion regulation (p < .01), psychological resilience (p < .001), mental well-being (p < .001) and physical symptoms and illness (p < .001), and in specific facets of quality of life (p < .001). The faith-based and secular versions of the program yielded comparable improvements in well-being. Improvements were comparable for older versus younger participants, except that younger participants reported greater improvements in perceived stress (p < .05). These preliminary findings support the application of an emotion regulation perspective to interventions for adults with high ACEs. The study, with its single-group design, represents a promising step in the translational research pathway and provides support for further studies utilizing comparison groups.