The Effects of Sleep on Emotional Target Detection Performance: A Novel iPad-Based Pediatric Game

Changing Agendas on Sleep, Treatment and Learning in Epilepsy (CASTLE) Sleep-E: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing an online behavioural sleep intervention with standard care in children with Rolandic epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Sleep and epilepsy have an established bidirectional relationship yet only one randomised controlled clinical trial has assessed the effectiveness of behavioural sleep interventions for children with epilepsy. The intervention was successful, but was delivered via face-to-face educational sessions with parents, which are costly and non-scalable to population level. The Changing Agendas on Sleep, Treatment and Learning in Epilepsy (CASTLE) Sleep-E trial addresses this problem by comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness in children with Rolandic epilepsy between standard care (SC) and SC augmented with a novel, tailored parent-led CASTLE Online Sleep Intervention (COSI) that incorporates evidence-based behavioural components.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

CASTLE Sleep-E is a UK-based, multicentre, open-label, active concurrent control, randomised, parallel-group, pragmatic superiority trial. A total of 110 children with Rolandic epilepsy will be recruited in outpatient clinics and allocated 1:1 to SC or SC augmented with COSI (SC+COSI). Primary clinical outcome is parent-reported sleep problem score (Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire). Primary health economic outcome is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective, Child Health Utility 9D Instrument). Parents and children (≥7 years) can opt into qualitative interviews and activities to share their experiences and perceptions of trial participation and managing sleep with Rolandic epilepsy.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The CASTLE Sleep-E protocol was approved by the Health Research Authority East Midlands (HRA)-Nottingham 1 Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/EM/0205). Trial results will be disseminated to scientific audiences, families, professional groups, managers, commissioners and policymakers. Pseudo-anonymised individual patient data will be made available after dissemination on reasonable request.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13202325.

The Making and Evaluation of Digital Games Used for the Assessment of Attention: Systematic Review

Background

Serious games are now widely used in many contexts, including psychological research and clinical use. One area of growing interest is that of cognitive assessment, which seeks to measure different cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and perception. Measuring these functions at both the population and individual levels can inform research and indicate health issues. Attention is an important function to assess, as an accurate measure of attention can help diagnose many common disorders, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and dementia. However, using games to assess attention poses unique problems, as games inherently manipulate attention through elements such as sound effects, graphics, and rewards, and research on adding game elements to assessments (ie, gamification) has shown mixed results. The process for developing cognitive tasks is robust, with high psychometric standards that must be met before these tasks are used for assessment. Although games offer more diverse approaches for assessment, there is no standard for how they should be developed or evaluated.

Objective

To better understand the field and provide guidance to interdisciplinary researchers, we aim to answer the question: How are digital games used for the cognitive assessment of attention made and measured?

Methods

We searched several databases for papers that described a digital game used to assess attention that could be deployed remotely without specialized hardware. We used Rayyan, a systematic review software, to screen the records before conducting a systematic review.

Results

The initial database search returned 49,365 papers. Our screening process resulted in a total of 74 papers that used a digital game to measure cognitive functions related to attention. Across the studies in our review, we found three approaches to making assessment games: gamifying cognitive tasks, creating custom games based on theories of cognition, and exploring potential assessment properties of commercial games. With regard to measuring the assessment properties of these games (eg, how accurately they assess attention), we found three approaches: comparison to a traditional cognitive task, comparison to a clinical diagnosis, and comparison to knowledge of cognition; however, most studies in our review did not evaluate the game’s properties (eg, if participants enjoyed the game).

Conclusions

Our review provides an overview of how games used for the assessment of attention are developed and evaluated. We further identified three barriers to advancing the field: reliance on assumptions, lack of evaluation, and lack of integration and standardization. We then recommend the best practices to address these barriers. Our review can act as a resource to help guide the field toward more standardized approaches and rigorous evaluation required for the widespread adoption of assessment games.

Impact of a behavioral intervention, delivered by pediatricians or psychologists, on sleep problems in children with ADHD: a cluster-randomized, translational trial

BACKGROUND

We have demonstrated the efficacy of a brief behavioral intervention for sleep in children with ADHD in a previous randomized controlled trial and now aim to examine whether this intervention is effective and cost-effective when delivered by pediatricians or psychologists in community settings.

METHODS

Translational, cluster-randomized trial of a behavioral intervention versus usual care from 19th January, 2015 to 30th June, 2017. Participants (n = 361) were children aged 5-13 years with ADHD and parent report of a moderate/severe sleep problem who met criteria for American Academy of Sleep Medicine criteria for chronic insomnia disorder, delayed sleep-wake phase disorder, or were experiencing sleep-related anxiety. Participants were randomized at the level of the pediatrician (n = 61) to intervention (n = 183) or usual care (n = 178). Families in the intervention group received two consultations with a pediatrician or a psychologist covering sleep hygiene and tailored behavioral strategies.

RESULTS

In an intention-to-treat analysis, at 3 and 6 months respectively, the proportion of children with moderate to severe sleep problems was lower in the intervention (28.0%, 35.8%) compared with usual care group (55.4%, 60.1%; 3 month: risk ratio (RR): 0.51, 95% CI 0.37, 0.70, p < .001; 6 month: RR: 0.58; 95% CI 0.45, 0.76, p < .001). Intervention children had improvements across multiple Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire subscales at 3 and 6 months. No benefits of the intervention were observed in other domains. Cost-effectiveness of the intervention was AUD 13 per percentage point reduction in child sleep problem at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A low-cost brief behavioral sleep intervention is effective in improving sleep problems when delivered by community clinicians. Greater sample comorbidity, lower intervention dose or insufficient clinician supervisions may have contributed to the lack benefits seen in our previous trial.