To understand caregivers’ perceptions about their children’s mealtime social experiences at school and how they believe these social experiences impact their children’s consumption of meals at school (both meals brought from home and school meals).

Qualitative data were originally collected as part of a larger mixed methods study using an embedded-QUAN dominant research design.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with United States (U.S.) caregivers over ZoomTM in English and Spanish during the 2021–2022 school year. The interview guide contained 14 questions on caregivers’ perceptions about their children’s experiences with school meals.

Caregivers of students in elementary, middle and high schools in rural, suburban and urban communities in California (n 46) and Maine (n 20) were interviewed. Most (60·6 %) were caregivers of children who were eligible for free or reduced-price meals.

Caregivers reported that an important benefit of eating meals at school is their child’s opportunity to socialise with their peers. Caregivers also stated that their child’s favourite aspect of school lunch is socialising with friends. However, some caregivers reported the cafeteria environment caused their children to feel anxious and not eat. Other caregivers reported that their children sometimes skipped lunch and chose to socialise with friends rather than wait in long lunch lines.

Socialising during school meals is important to both caregivers and students. Policies such as increasing lunch period lengths and holding recess before lunch have been found to promote school meal consumption and could reinforce the positive social aspects of mealtime for students.

To develop a new caregiver-assisted pain coping skills training protocol specifically tailored for community-dwelling persons with cognitive impairment and pain, and assess its feasibility and acceptability.

In Phase I, we conducted interviews with 10 patient–caregiver dyads to gather feedback about intervention content and delivery. Phase II was a single-arm pilot test to evaluate the intervention's feasibility and acceptability. Dyads in the pilot study (n = 11) completed baseline surveys, received five intervention sessions, and then completed post-intervention surveys. Analyses focused on feasibility and acceptability.

Dyads responded positively to the pain coping skills presented in the interviews; their feedback was used to refine the intervention. Findings from the pilot study suggested that the intervention was feasible and acceptable. 69% of eligible dyads consented, 82% completed all five intervention sessions, and 100% completed the post-treatment assessment. Caregivers reported high satisfaction ratings. They also reported using the pain coping skills on a regular basis, and that they found most of the skills helpful and easy to use.

These preliminary findings suggest that a caregiver-assisted pain coping skills intervention is feasible and acceptable, and that it may be a promising approach to managing pain in patients with cognitive impairment.

The COVID-19 pandemic and mitigation measures are likely to have a marked effect on mental health. It is important to use longitudinal data to improve inferences.

To quantify the prevalence of depression, anxiety and mental well-being before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, to identify groups at risk of depression and/or anxiety during the pandemic.

Data were from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) index generation (n = 2850, mean age 28 years) and parent generation (n = 3720, mean age 59 years), and Generation Scotland (n = 4233, mean age 59 years). Depression was measured with the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire in ALSPAC and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 in Generation Scotland. Anxiety and mental well-being were measured with the Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment-7 and the Short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale.

Depression during the pandemic was similar to pre-pandemic levels in the ALSPAC index generation, but those experiencing anxiety had almost doubled, at 24% (95% CI 23–26%) compared with a pre-pandemic level of 13% (95% CI 12–14%). In both studies, anxiety and depression during the pandemic was greater in younger members, women, those with pre-existing mental/physical health conditions and individuals in socioeconomic adversity, even when controlling for pre-pandemic anxiety and depression.

These results provide evidence for increased anxiety in young people that is coincident with the pandemic. Specific groups are at elevated risk of depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important for planning current mental health provisions and for long-term impact beyond this pandemic.

For patients with bifascicular block and syncope of unknown origin, different American Heart Association guidelines give Class 2A recommendations for two treatments: the implantable loop recorder (ILR) and empiric pacemaker insertion (PM). Equipoise reflected in guidelines may contribute to uncertainty in management and inefficient resource use. The objective of this analysis is to determine the cost-effectiveness of ILR compared to PM in the management of older adults (age>50 years) with bifascicular block and syncope over two years, from the perspective of a Canadian publicly funded health care system, in the Syncope: Pacing or Recording In ThE Later Years (SPRITELY) trial.

Resource utilization data was collected throughout the trial, and unit costs were assigned (2017 Canadian dollars). Utility was measured at baseline and annually with the EQ-5D-3L. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated as area-under-the-curve, and adjusted for baseline imbalances in utility. Confidence intervals for the incremental cost effectiveness ratio were generated with non-parametric bootstrapping.

Mean cost in participants randomized to PM was CAD 9,759 (USD 7,400), compared to CAD 13,453 (USD 10,200) in participants randomized to ILR. The ILR strategy resulted in 0.020 QALYs more than the PM strategy. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio was CAD 186,553 (95% CI: −831,950–1,191,816) (USD 141,900, 95% CI: −632,740–906,440) per additional QALY. In 1,000 bootstrapped replicates, the cost of the ILR strategy was always greater than that of the PM strategy. At the threshold of CAD 50,000 (USD 38,000) per additional QALY, the probability that the ILR strategy is the cost effective option is 0.504.

ILR costs were greater than PM costs, with little difference in QALY outcomes over two-years. Findings are generalizable to patients similar to SPRITELY participants, from the perspective of the Canadian health care system. However, practice pattern variation and payment systems inhibit generalizability to other countries. Future analysis will explore cost and QALY outcomes in countries that participated in the SPRITELY trial.