No abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess the content, favourability and generality of perceptions held about overweight children. The research also addressed whether anti‐fat biases change with age and whether they result from a strong association between overweight and bad behaviour, a weak association between overweight and good behaviour or both. Seventy‐three 5‐ to 10‐year‐olds were read aloud a number of short stories containing characters demonstrating high and low athletic, academic, artistic and social abilities. They were then shown eight different pairs of cards; each pair comprised a drawing of an average‐weight and an overweight version of the same child. Participants were then asked to point to the pictures that looked most like the good and bad characters in the stories. The results demonstrated that 5‐ to 8‐year‐olds were significantly less likely to choose an overweight picture to represent the characters with high athletic, academic, artistic and social ability. In contrast, 9‐ to 10‐year‐olds were significantly less likely to choose an overweight figure to represent the characters with high athletic ability, did not differentiate on the basis of weight for the academic and artistic stories, and were significantly more likely to choose an overweight picture as having high social ability.

ObjectiveThere are many uncertainties surrounding the aetiology, treatment and sequelae of hyperemesis gravidarum (HG). Prioritising research questions could reduce research waste, helping researchers and funders direct attention to those questions which most urgently need addressing. The HG priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to identify and rank the top 25 priority research questions important to both patients and clinicians.MethodsFollowing the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, an HG PSP steering group was established. Stakeholders representing patients, carers and multidisciplinary professionals completed an online survey to gather uncertainties. Eligible uncertainties related to HG. Uncertainties on nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and those on complementary treatments were not eligible. Questions were verified against the evidence. Two rounds of prioritisation included an online ranking survey and a 1-hour consensus workshop.Results1009 participants (938 patients/carers, 118 professionals with overlap between categories) submitted 2899 questions. Questions originated from participants in 26 different countries, and people from 32 countries took part in the first prioritisation stage. 66 unique questions emerged, which were evidence checked according to the agreed protocol. 65 true uncertainties were narrowed via an online ranking survey to 26 unranked uncertainties. The consensus workshop was attended by 19 international patients and clinicians who reached consensus on the top 10 questions for international researchers to address. More patients than professionals took part in the surveys but were equally distributed during the consensus workshop. Participants from low-income and middle-income countries noted that the priorities may be different in their settings.ConclusionsBy following the JLA method, a prioritised list of uncertainties relevant to both HG patients and their clinicians has been identified which can inform the international HG research agenda, funders and policy-makers. While it is possible to conduct an international PSP, results from developed countries may not be as relevant in low-income and middle-income countries.

Objective There are many uncertainties surrounding the aetiology, treatment and sequelae of hyperemesis gravidarum (HG). Prioritising research questions could reduce research waste, helping researchers and funders direct attention to those questions which most urgently need addressing. The HG priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to identify and rank the top 25 priority research questions important to both patients and clinicians. Methods Following the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, an HG PSP steering group was established. Stakeholders representing patients, carers and multidisciplinary professionals completed an online survey to gather uncertainties. Eligible uncertainties related to HG. Uncertainties on nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and those on complementary treatments were not eligible. Questions were verified against the evidence. Two rounds of prioritisation included an online ranking survey and a 1-hour consensus workshop. Results 1009 participants (938 patients/carers, 118 professionals with overlap between categories) submitted 2899 questions. Questions originated from participants in 26 different countries, and people from 32 countries took part in the first prioritisation stage. 66 unique questions emerged, which were evidence checked according to the agreed protocol. 65 true uncertainties were narrowed via an online ranking survey to 26 unranked uncertainties. The consensus workshop was attended by 19 international patients and clinicians who reached consensus on the top 10 questions for international researchers to address. More patients than professionals took part in the surveys but were equally distributed during the consensus workshop. Participants from low-income and middleincome countries noted that the priorities may be different in their settings. Conclusions By following the JLA method, a prioritised list of uncertainties relevant to both HG patients and their clinicians has been identified which can inform the international HG research agenda, funders and policymakers. While it is possible to conduct an international PSP, results from developed countries may not be as relevant in low-income and middle-income countries.

Maternal depression is associated with adverse child outcomes including antisocial behaviour (ASB). Prospective longitudinal studies have focused on the timing and cumulative exposure to maternal depression to further delineate the association and mechanisms of effect. The objective of this systematic review was to synthesise and evaluate the findings of longitudinal studies of maternal depression and offspring antisocial behaviour. Three databases were searched (Psychinfo, Web of Science, and Medline). Twenty of 5936 studies met inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme criteria [Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (2017) CASP (cohort observation checklist). https ://casp-uk. net/wpcon tent/uploa ds/2018/01/CASP-Cohor t-Study -Check list.pdf]. Results of individual studies were highly varied, using diverse analytical approaches and not all studies explored the independent effects of different episodes. Only three studies examined hypothesised mechanisms. Prenatal, postnatal, and later episodes of depression were all predictive of antisocial outcomes. One particular time period of depression exposure did not emerge as more predictive of offspring ASB than another. However, measures of maternal depression after the perinatal period were limited and typically included a one-off assessment of mothers' depressive symptoms that was concurrent to the assessment of offspring ASB. When cumulative exposure to maternal depression and specific timing effects were measured within the same study it was cumulative exposure that conferred the greatest risk for offspring ASB-particularly when this exposure began during the perinatal period. Findings are discussed in terms of limitations in the literature and highlight the need for future research to examine the biological and environmental mechanisms that underpin associations between maternal depression and offspring antisocial behaviour during different stages of development.