https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/8617 2026-07-22T11:17:07Z https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/33604 Title: Move Together Buckinghamshire: Protocol for a Pragmatic Mixed-Methods Evaluation of a Community Physical Activity Programme for Older Adults with Long-Term Conditions Authors: Norris, E; Hings, R; Bailey, D; Victor, C; Anokye, N; Banstola, A; Korakaki, DA; Carrillo, A; Mansfield, L Abstract: Introduction Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) is a research programme that seeks to develop and evaluate a comprehensive exercise-based rehabilitation intervention designed for people with multimorbidity, the presence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs). This paper describes the protocol for a randomised trial to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PERFORM intervention, study design and processes. Methods and analysis A multicentre, parallel two-group randomised trial with individual 2:1 allocation to the PERFORM exercise-based intervention plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). The primary outcome of this feasibility trial will be to assess whether prespecified progression criteria (recruitment, retention, intervention adherence) are met to progress to the full randomised trial. The trial will be conducted across three UK sites and 60 people with MLTCs, defined as two or more LTCs, with at least one having evidence of the beneficial effect of exercise. The PERFORM intervention comprises an 8-week (twice a week for 6 weeks and once a week for 2 weeks) supervised rehabilitation programme of personalised exercise training and self-management education delivered by trained healthcare professionals followed by two maintenance sessions. Trial participants will be recruited over a 4.5-month period, and outcomes assessed at baseline (prerandomisation) and 3 months postrandomisation and include health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, symptom burden, frailty, exercise capacity, physical activity, sleep, cognition and serious adverse events. A mixed-methods process evaluation will assess acceptability, feasibility and fidelity of intervention delivery and feasibility of trial processes. An economic evaluation will assess the feasibility of data collection and estimate the costs of the PERFORM intervention. Ethics and dissemination The trial has been given favourable opinion by the West Midlands, Edgbaston Research Ethics Service (Ref: 23/WM/0057). Participants will be asked to give full, written consent to take part by trained researchers. Findings will be disseminated via journals, presentations and targeted communications to clinicians, commissioners, service users and patients and the public. 2023-01-01T00:00:00Z https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/33577 Title: Decision-analytic models in the economic evaluation of community health worker programmes globally: a systematic review Authors: Chen, S; Banstola, A; Junghans Minton, C; Harris, M; Anokye, N Abstract: Introduction: Economic evidence on community health worker (CHW) programmes is crucial for scaling these initiatives. Although decision-analytic models (DAMs) are essential for projecting long-term value, it is unclear how rigorously they have been applied to CHW evaluations, potentially compromising the reliability and comparability of cost-effectiveness estimates used for policy decisions. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify full economic evaluations of CHW-led or CHW-integrated interventions that employed a DAM. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, six databases (Medline, Embase, Global Health, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus) were searched from inception to June 2025. Eligible studies were full economic evaluations assessing CHW-led or CHW-integrated interventions using DAMs. Study selection and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was appraised using the Philips checklist, and data were extracted on model type, data sources and validation practices. Findings were synthesised narratively across model structures, income groups and quality domains. Results: 37 studies met the inclusion criteria. Decision trees were used in 32% of studies and Markov models in 30% with the remainder applying microsimulation, dynamic transmission or hybrid approaches. Most evaluations were undertaken in low- and middle-income countries, with few from low-income or high-income settings. Data constraints in low-income settings limited model complexity, whereas models in high-income settings tended to adopt more sophisticated structures but narrower intervention scopes. The mean quality score was 67%, with substantial gaps in model validation and limited exploration of structural uncertainty. Overall, 84% of studies concluded that CHW-led interventions were cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios generally favourable across settings. Conclusions: Although CHW interventions are generally cost-effective, the strength of this evidence is constrained by methodological limitations in existing models. Future modelling should prioritise rigorous validation, localisation of input data and explicit valuation of CHW and societal contributions to enhance the credibility of economic evidence for policy use. PROSPERO registration number: CRD420251066586. Description: Data availability statement: Data are available on reasonable request. 2026-06-22T00:00:00Z https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/33573 Title: Walking the walk through the open door: Realising Open Science infrastructures Authors: Norris, E; Braun, M; Green, JA; Bernard, P; Peters, G-J Abstract: ... Description: ... 2026-01-01T00:00:00Z https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/33558 Title: The views of young people on how to prevent or address loneliness: analysis of British survey data from the BBC Loneliness Experiment Authors: Hall, A; Barreto, M; Victor, C; Qualter, P; Pitman, A Abstract: Loneliness in adolescence is a promising intervention target because of the high prevalence of loneliness at this developmental stage, the demonstrable associations with mental illness, and potential to prevent the onset of mental disorder. However, the acceptability of loneliness interventions to adolescents is questionable, and may explain the weak trial evidence to support effectiveness. In the current study, we captured the views of young people about which interventions they recommended for preventing or addressing loneliness. Using thematic analysis and descriptive statistics we analysed qualitative and quantitative data for 393 British participants age 16-18 years in the BBC Loneliness Experiment, recruited in 2018. Analysis identified three main themes: Connecting with others; Changing how one relates to others; and Changing how one experiences solitude. Responses to a list of 21 suggested solutions to loneliness showed that >50% endorsed each of: distraction approaches, focussing on work, study, or hobbies, talking about one’s feelings, and joining a club. Our findings suggest that young people find the experience of loneliness distressing but are resourceful in finding strategies to prevent or mitigate it. Learning to take pleasure in their own company was described as a way of avoiding solitude being experienced as a stigmatised state of aloneness. These, and other important life skills, such as seeking out social connections and using opportunities for self-improvement, provided valuable guidance for peers. Their advice provides guidance for future research and co-produced intervention development to address loneliness in this age group. Description: Data availability statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.; This is a PDF of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form. As such, this version is no longer the Accepted Manuscript, but it is not yet the definitive Version of Record; we are providing this early version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that Elsevier’s sharing policy for the Published Journal Article applies to this version, see: https://www.elsevier.com/about/ policies-and-standards/sharing#4-published-journal-article. Please also note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. 2026-07-02T00:00:00Z