Personal independence payment (PIP) is a benefit that covers additional daily living costs people may incur from a long-term health condition or disability. Little is known about PIP receipt and associated factors among people who access mental health services, and trends over time. Individual-level data linking healthcare records with administrative records on benefits receipt have been non-existent in the UK.

To explore how PIP receipt varies over time, including PIP type, and its association with sociodemographic and diagnostic patient characteristics among people who access mental health services.

A data-set was established by linking electronic mental health records from the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust with administrative records from the Department for Work and Pensions.

Of 143 714 working-age patients, 37 120 (25.8%) had received PIP between 2013 and 2019, with PIP receipt steadily increasing over time. Two in three patients (63.2%) had received both the daily living and mobility component. PIP receipt increased with age. Those in more deprived areas were more likely to receive PIP. The likelihood of PIP receipt varied by ethnicity. Patients diagnosed with a severe mental illness had 1.48 odds (95% CI 1.42–1.53) of having received PIP, compared with those with a different psychiatric diagnosis.

One in four people who accessed mental health services had received PIP, with higher levels seen among those most likely in need, as indicated by a severe mental illness diagnosis. Future research using this data-set could explore the average duration of PIP receipt in people who access mental health services, and re-assessment patterns by psychiatric diagnosis.

This study investigated the relationship between various intrapersonal factors and the discrepancy between subjective and objective cognitive difficulties in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The first aim was to examine these associations in patients with valid cognitive symptom reporting. The next aim was to investigate the same associations in patients with invalid scores on tests of cognitive symptom overreporting.

The sample comprised 154 adults who underwent a neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. Patients were divided into groups based on whether they had valid cognitive symptom reporting and valid test performance (n = 117) or invalid cognitive symptom overreporting but valid test performance (n = 37). Scores from multiple symptom and performance validity tests were used to group patients. Using patients’ scores from a cognitive concerns self-report measure and composite index of objective performance tests, we created a subjective-objective discrepancy index to quantify the extent of cognitive concerns that exceeded difficulties on objective testing. Various measures were used to assess intrapersonal factors thought to influence the subjective-objective cognitive discrepancy, including demographics, estimated premorbid intellectual ability, internalizing symptoms, somatic symptoms, and perceived social support.

Patients reported greater cognitive difficulties on subjective measures than observed on objective testing. The discrepancy between subjective and objective scores was most strongly associated with internalizing and somatic symptoms. These associations were observed in both validity groups.

Subjective cognitive concerns may be more indicative of the extent of internalizing and somatic symptoms than actual cognitive impairment in adults with ADHD, regardless if they have valid scores on cognitive symptom overreporting tests.

Timely intervention is beneficial to the effectiveness of eating disorder (ED) treatment, but limited capacity within ED services means that these disorders are often not treated with sufficient speed. This service evaluation extends previous research into guided self-help (GSH) for adults with bulimic spectrum EDs by assessing the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of virtually delivered GSH using videoconferencing.

Patients with bulimia nervosa (BN), binge eating disorder (BED) and other specified feeding and eating disorders (OSFED) waiting for treatment in a large specialist adult ED out-patient service were offered virtually delivered GSH. The programme used an evidence-based cognitive behavioural self-help book. Individuals were supported by non-expert coaches, who delivered the eight-session programme via videoconferencing.

One hundred and thirty patients were allocated to a GSH coach between 1 September 2020 and 30 September 2022; 106 (82%) started treatment and 78 (60%) completed treatment. Amongst completers, there were large reductions in ED behaviours and attitudinal symptoms, measured by the ED-15. The largest effect sizes for change between pre- and post-treatment were seen for binge eating episode frequency (d = –0.89) and concerns around eating (d = –1.72). Patients from minoritised ethnic groups were over-represented in the non-completer group.

Virtually delivered GSH is feasible, acceptable and effective in reducing ED symptoms amongst those with bulimic spectrum disorders. Implementing virtually delivered GSH reduced waiting times, offering a potential solution for long waiting times for ED treatment. Further research is needed to compare GSH to other brief therapies and investigate barriers for patients from culturally diverse groups.

Health numeracy is the understanding and application of information conveyed with numbers, tables and graphs, and probabilities in order to effectively manage one's own healthcare. Health numeracy is a vital aspect of communicating with healthcare providers and participating in one's own medical decision making, which is especially important in aging populations. Current literature indicates that assessing and establishing one's health numeracy abilities is among the first steps in providing necessary resources and accommodating patients' individual needs. Additionally, older adults with diffuse cognitive impairment often have issues with facets of executive functioning; however, the extant literature does not discuss the role of executive functioning in relation to health numeracy in this population. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between performance on tasks of executive functioning and objectively-measured health numeracy abilities in older adult patients.

This study included a sample of 42 older adult patients referred for neuropsychological evaluation for memory complaints who were administered the Test of Premorbid Functioning (TOPF), Trail Making Test - Part B (TMT-B), and Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT Color Word Interference [CWI]) as part of a larger standardized battery. Patients were also administered the Numerical Understand in Medicine Instrument - Short Form (NUMI-SF). All included patients had <2 performance validity test failures. The sample was racially diverse (47.6% Black, 35.7% White, 14.3% Hispanic, 2.4% Asian) and 54.8% female. Average age was 62.95 (SD= 8.6) and average education was 14.1 (SD=2.7). Diagnostically, 47.6% of the sample were cognitively normal, 33.3% had mild cognitive impairment, and 19.0% had dementia. Average NUMI-SF score was 4.79 (SD= 1.7). Two multiple regressions were conducted to evaluate the extent to which executive functioning, as measured by the TMT-B and SCWT CWI predicted NUMI-SF, and the additive predictive power of premorbid IQ and demographics via the TOPF on the relationship between executive functioning and NUMI-SF.

The first regression, which measured the relationship between the TMT-B and SCWT CWI upon NUMI-SF scores, was not significant (p=.616). The model was significant with the addition of the TOPF (ß=.595, p<.001) and TOPF alone predicted ∼60% of the variance in NUMI-SF score, while TMT-B and SCWT CWI remained non-significant.

These results indicate that common measures of executive functioning are not reliable predictors of health literacy with or without the moderating of premorbid intellectual functioning taken into consideration. This suggests that health numeracy is likely to be minimally affected by deficits in executive functioning and rather may be better accounted for by premorbid intellectual functioning and/or other sociodemographic factors (e.g. socioeconomic status, education quality, occupation). Future studies will benefit from elucidating the contributions of other social determinant factors on predicting health numeracy.

Awareness of risk factors associated with any form of impairment is critical for formulating optimal prevention and treatment planning. Millions worldwide suffer from some form of cognitive impairment, with the highest rates amongst Black and Hispanic populations. The latter have also been found to achieve lower scores on standardized neurocognitive testing than other racial/ethnic groups. Understanding the socio-demographic risk factors that lead to this discrepancy in neurocognitive functioning across racial groups is crucial. Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), are one aspect of social determinants of health. ACES have been linked to a greater risk of future memory impairment, such as dementia. Moreover, higher instances of ACEs have been found amongst racial minorities. Considering the current literature, the purpose of this exploratory research is to better understand how social determinants, more specifically, ACEs, may play a role in the development of cognitive impairment.

This cross-sectional study included data from an urban, public Midwestern academic medical center. There was a total of 64 adult clinical patients that were referred for a neuropsychological evaluation. All patients were administered a standardized neurocognitive battery that included the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as well as a 10-item ACE questionnaire, which measures levels of adverse childhood experiences. The sample was 73% Black and 27% White. The average age was 66 (SD=8.6) and average education was 12.6 years (SD=3.4). A two-way ANOVA was conducted to evaluate the interaction of racial identity (White; Black) and ACE score on MoCA total score. An ACE score >4 was categorized as “high”; ACE <4 was categorized as “low.”

There was not a significant interaction of race and ACE group on MoCA score (p=.929) nor a significant main effect of ACE score (p=.541). Interestingly, there was a significant main effect of Race on MoCA (p=.029). White patients had an average MoCA score of 21.82 (sd=4.77). Black patients had an average MoCA score of 17.54 (sd=5.91).

Overall, Black patients demonstrated statistically lower scores on the MoCA than White patients. There was no significant difference on MoCA score between races when also accounting for ACE scores. Given this study’s findings, one’s level of adverse childhood experiences does not appear to impact one’s cognitive ability later in life. There is a significant difference in cognitive ability between races, specifically Black and White people, which suggests there may be social determinants other than childhood experiences to be explored that influence cognitive impairment.

Understanding healthcare information is an important aspect in managing one’s own needs and navigating a complex healthcare system. Health numeracy and literacy reflect the ability to understand and apply information conveyed numerically (i.e., graphs, statistics, proportions, etc.) and written/verbally (i.e., treatment instructions, appointments, diagnostic results) to communicate with healthcare providers, understand one’s medical condition(s) and treatment plan, and participate in informed medical decision-making. Cognitive impairment has been shown to impact one’s ability to understand complex medical information. The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between the degree of cognitive impairment and one’s ability to perform on measures of health numeracy and literacy.

This cross-sectional study included data from 38 adult clinical patients referred for neuropsychological evaluation for primary memory complaints at an urban, public Midwestern academic medical center. All patients were administered a standardized neurocognitive battery that included the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), as well as measures of both health numeracy (Numeracy Understanding of Medicine Instrument-Short Version [NUMI-SF]) and health literacy (Short Assessment of Health Literacy-English [SAHL-E]). The sample was 58% female and 60% Black/40% White. Mean age was 65 (SD=9.4) and mean education was 14.4 years (SD=2.5). The sample was further split into three groups based on cognitive diagnosis determined by comprehensive neuropsychological assessment (i.e., No Diagnosis [34%]; Mild Cognitive Impairment [MCI; 29%]; Dementia [34%]).Groups were well matched and did not statistically differ in premorbid intellectual functioning (F=1.96, p=.157; No Diagnosis, M=100, SD=7.92; MCI, M=99, SD=8.87; Dementia, M=94, SD=7.72) ANOVAs were conducted to evaluate differences between clinical groups on the MoCA, NUMI-SF, and SAHL-E. Multiple regressions were then conducted to determine the association of MoCA scores with NUMI-SF and SAHL-E performance.

As expected, the Dementia group performed significantly below both the No Diagnosis and MCI groups on the MoCA (F=19.92, p<.001) with a large effect (ηp2=.540). Significant differences were also found on the NUM-SF (F=5.90, p>.05) and on the SAHL-E (F=6.20, p>.05) with large effects (ηp2=.258 and ηp2=.267, respectively). Regression found that MoCA performance did not predict performance on the NUMI-SF and SAHL-E in the No Diagnosis group (F=2.30, p=.809) or the MCI group (F=1.31, p=.321). Conversely, the MoCA significantly predicted performance on the NUMI-SF and SAHL-E for the Dementia (F=15.59, p=.001) group.

Degree of cognitive impairment is associated with understanding of health numeracy and literacy information, with patients diagnosed with dementia performing most poorly on these measures. Patients with normal cognitive functioning demonstrated a significantly better understanding of health numeracy and health literacy. This study supports the notion that as cognitive functioning diminishes, incremental support is necessary for patients to understand medical information pertaining to their continued care and medical decision-making, particularly as it relates to both numerical and written information.

Engaging patients, caregivers, and other stakeholders to help guide the research process is a cornerstone of patient-centered research. Lived expertise may help ensure the relevance of research questions, promote practices that are satisfactory to research participants, improve transparency, and assist with disseminating findings.

Traditionally engagement has been conducted face-to-face in the local communities in which research operates. Decentralized platform trials pose new challenges for the practice of engagement. We used a remote model for stakeholder engagement, relying on Zoom meetings and blog communications.

Here we describe the approach used for research partnership with patients, caregivers, and clinicians in the planning and oversight of the ACTIV-6 trial and the impact of this work. We also present suggestions for future remote engagement.

The ACTIV-6 experience may inform proposed strategies for future engagement in decentralized trials.