Do network centrality measures predict dental outcomes of Indigenous children over time?

Exploring the Reported Strengths and Limitations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Research: A Narrative Review of Intervention Studies

High quality intervention research is needed to inform evidence-based practice and policy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. We searched for studies published from 2008-2020 in the PubMed database. A narrative review of intervention literature was conducted, where we identified researcher reported strengths and limitations of their research practice. A total of 240 studies met inclusion criteria which were categorised as evaluations, trials, pilot interventions or implementation studies. Reported strengths included community engagement and partnerships; sample qualities; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander involvement in research; culturally appropriate and safe research practice; capacity building efforts; providing resources or reducing costs for services and communities; understanding local culture and context; and appropriate timelines for completion. Reported limitations included difficulties achieving the target sample size; inadequate time; insufficient funding and resources; limited capacity of health workers and services; and inadequate community involvement and communication issues. This review highlights that community consultation and leadership coupled with appropriate time and funding, enables Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health intervention research to be conducted. These factors can enable effective intervention research, and consequently can help improve health and wellbeing outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Mental health concerns and network structures of psychological helpline help-seekers during the COVID-19 pandemic in China: Pandemic stage differences

BACKGROUND

The present study aimed to investigate the pandemic stage differences of mental health helpline help-seekers emotional responses, psychiatric symptoms, and related network structures during the COVID-19 pandemic in China.

METHODS

The data was collected by a large-scale psychological helpline in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China. Counselor-reported information about the help-seekers pandemic-related emotional responses and psychiatric symptoms were recorded. A total of 26,870 callers' data from February 28, 2020, to April 23, 2021, were collected in the present study. A linear probability model and network analysis were conducted to determine the differences in help-seekers mental health concerns and network structures between the pandemic (stage I, from February 28, 2020, to April 28, 2020, N = 9821) and the regular prevention and control period (stage II, from April 29, 2020, to April 23, 2021, N = 17,049).

RESULTS

Results revealed that anger, sadness, and obsession symptoms increased in stage II while symptoms of anxiety, somatization, and feelings of fear and stress were relieved. The network analysis results demonstrated both stage I and II networks centered on anxiety firmly. In stage II, the connection between anxiety and hypochondria and fear's strength centrality descended significantly.

LIMITATIONS

The mental health outcomes of callers only included the counselor-reported data.

CONCLUSIONS

The mental health concerns of helpline callers showed pandemic-related stage differences.

Family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being by primary healthcare services

BACKGROUND

Primary healthcare, particularly Indigenous-led services, are well placed to deliver services that reflect the needs of Indigenous children and their families. Important characteristics identified by families for primary health care include services that support families, accommodate sociocultural needs, recognise extended family child-rearing practices, and Indigenous ways of knowing and doing business. Indigenous family-centred care interventions have been developed and implemented within primary healthcare services to plan, implement, and support the care of children, immediate and extended family and the home environment. The delivery of family-centred interventions can be through environmental, communication, educational, counselling, and family support approaches.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of family-centred interventions delivered by primary healthcare services in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA on a range of physical, psychosocial, and behavioural outcomes of Indigenous children (aged from conception to less than five years), parents, and families.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 22 September 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, quasi-RCTs, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series of family-centred care interventions that included Indigenous children aged less than five years from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. Interventions were included if they met the assessment criteria for family-centred interventions and were delivered in primary health care. Comparison interventions could include usual maternal and child health care or one form of family-centred intervention versus another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. overall health and well-being, 2. psychological health and emotional behaviour of children, 3. physical health and developmental health outcomes of children, 4. family health-enhancing lifestyle or behaviour outcomes, 5. psychological health of parent/carer. 6. adverse events or harms. Our secondary outcomes were 7. parenting knowledge and awareness, 8. family evaluation of care, 9. service access and utilisation, 10. family-centredness of consultation processes, and 11. economic costs and outcomes associated with the interventions. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for our primary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs and two cluster-RCTs that investigated the effect of family-centred care interventions delivered by primary healthcare services for Indigenous early child well-being. There were 1270 mother-child dyads and 1924 children aged less than five years recruited. Seven studies were from the USA, two from New Zealand, one from Canada, and one delivered in both Australia and New Zealand. The focus of interventions varied and included three studies focused on early childhood caries; three on childhood obesity; two on child behavioural problems; and one each on negative parenting patterns, child acute respiratory illness, and sudden unexpected death in infancy. Family-centred education was the most common type of intervention delivered. Three studies compared family-centred care to usual care and seven studies provided some 'minimal' intervention to families such as education in the form of pamphlets or newsletters. One study provided a minimal intervention during the child's first 24 months and then the family-centred care intervention for one year. No studies had low or unclear risk of bias across all domains. All studies had a high risk of bias for the blinding of participants and personnel domain. Family-centred care may improve overall health and well-being of Indigenous children and their families, but the evidence was very uncertain. The pooled effect estimate from 11 studies suggests that family-centred care improved the overall health and well-being of Indigenous children and their families compared no family-centred care (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.24; 2386 participants). We are very uncertain whether family-centred care compared to no family-centred care improves the psychological health and emotional behaviour of children as measured by the Infant Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (ITSEA) (Competence domain) (mean difference (MD) 0.04, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.11; 2 studies, 384 participants). We assessed the evidence as being very uncertain about the effect of family-centred care on physical health and developmental health outcomes of children. Pooled data from eight trials on physical health and developmental outcomes found there was little to no difference between the intervention and the control groups (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.26; 1961 participants). The evidence is also very unclear whether family-centred care improved family-enhancing lifestyle and behaviours outcomes. Nine studies measured family health-enhancing lifestyle and behaviours and pooled analysis found there was little to no difference between groups (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.39; 1969 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence of little to no difference for the psychological health of parents and carers when they participated in family-centred care compared to any control group (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.22; 5 studies, 975 parents/carers). Two studies stated that there were no adverse events as a result of the intervention. No additional data were provided. No studies reported from the health service providers perspective or on outcomes for family's evaluation of care or family-centredness of consultation processes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence to suggest that family-centred care delivered by primary healthcare services improves the overall health and well-being of Indigenous children, parents, and families. However, due to lack of data, there was not enough evidence to determine whether specific outcomes such as child health and development improved as a result of family-centred interventions. Seven of the 11 studies delivered family-centred education interventions. Seven studies were from the USA and centred on two particular trials, the 'Healthy Children, Strong Families' and 'Family Spirit' trials. As the evidence is very low certainty for all outcomes, further high-quality trials are needed to provide robust evidence for the use of family-centred care interventions for Indigenous children aged less than five years.