No abstract

Recruiting participants is a challenge for many health, medical and psychosocial research projects. One tool more frequently being used to improve recruitment is the social networking website Facebook. A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that have used Facebook to recruit participants of all ages, to any psychosocial, health or medical research. 110 unique studies that used Facebook as a recruitment source were included in the review. The majority of studies used a cross-sectional design (80%) and addressed a physical health or disease issue (57%). Half (49%) of the included studies reported specific details of the Facebook recruitment process. Researchers paid between $1.36 and $110 per completing participants (Mean = $17.48, SD = $23.06). Among studies that examined the representativeness of their sample, the majority concluded (86%) their Facebook-recruited samples were similarly representative of samples recruited via traditional methods. These results indicate that Facebook is an effective and cost-efficient recruitment method. Researchers should consider their target group, advertisement wording, offering incentives and no-cost methods of recruitment when considering Facebook as a recruitment source. It is hoped this review will assist researchers to make decisions regarding the use of Facebook as a recruitment tool in future research.

Background Lifestyle risk behaviours typically emerge during adolescence, track into adulthood, and commonly co-occur. Interventions targeting multiple risk behaviours in adolescents have the potential to efficiently improve health outcomes, yet further evidence is required to determine their effect. We reviewed the effectiveness of eHealth school-based interventions targeting multiple lifestyle risk behaviours. Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library databases between Jan 1, 2000, and March 14, 2019, with no language restrictions, for publications on school-based eHealth multiple health behaviour interventions in humans. We also screened the grey literature for unpublished data. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials of eHealth (internet, computers, tablets, mobile technology, or tele-health) interventions targeting two or more of six behaviours of interest: alcohol use, smoking, diet, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep. Primary outcomes of interest were the prevention or reduction of unhealthy behaviours, or improvement in healthy behaviours of the six behaviours. Outcomes were summarised in a narrative synthesis and combined using random-effects meta-analysis. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO, identifier CRD42017072163. Findings Of 10 571 identified records, 22 publications assessing 16 interventions were included, comprising 18 873 students, of whom on average 56•2% were female, with a mean age of 13•41 years (SD 1•52). eHealth schoolbased multiple health behaviour change interventions significantly increased fruit and vegetable intake (standard mean difference 0•11, 95% CI 0•03 to 0•19; p=0•007) and both accelerometer-measured (0•33, 0•05 to 0•61; p=0•02) and self-reported (0•14, 0•05 to 0•23; p=0•003) physical activity, and reduced screen time (-0•09,-0•17 to-0•01; p=0•03) immediately after the intervention; however, these effects were not sustained at follow-up when data were available. No effect was seen for alcohol or smoking, fat or sugar-sweetened beverage or snack consumption. No studies examined sleep or used mobile health interventions. The risk of bias in masking of final outcome assessors and selective outcome reporting was high or unclear across studies and overall we deemd the quality of evidence to be low to very low. Interpretation eHealth school-based interventions addressing multiple lifestyle risk behaviours can be effective in improving physical activity, screen time, and fruit and vegetable intake. However, effects were small and only evident immediately after the intervention. Further high quality, adolescent-informed research is needed to develop eHealth interventions that can modify multiple behaviours and sustain long-term effects.

No abstract

Objectives: This review aimed to identify free, high-quality, smoking cessation mobile applications (apps) that adhere to Australian smoking cessation treatment guidelines. Methods:A systematic search of smoking cessation apps was conducted using Google. The technical quality of relevant apps was rated using the Mobile Application Rating Scale. The content of apps identified as high quality was assessed for adherence to smoking cessation treatment guidelines.Results: 112 relevant apps were identified. The majority were of poor technical quality and only six 'high-quality' apps were identified. These apps adhered to Australian treatment guidelines in part. The efficacy of two apps had been previously evaluated. Conclusions:In lieu of more substantial research in this area, it is suggested that the highquality apps identified in this review may be more likely than other available apps to encourage smoking cessation. Implications for public health:Smoking cessation apps have the potential to address many barriers that prevent smoking cessation support being provided; however few high-quality smoking cessation apps are currently available in Australia, very few have been evaluated and the app market is extremely volatile. More research to evaluate smoking cessation apps, and sustained funding for evidence-based apps, is needed.

No abstract

It may be important to tailor interventions for co-existing mental disorders and substance use by substance type and type of mental disorder. For example, interventions might be improved by including alternative coping strategies to tobacco and/or alcohol use, by addressing the social role of alcohol and by helping people with mental disorders using cannabis to gain pleasure from their lives in other ways.

Background Smartphone applications (apps) designed to assist users to reduce hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption show potential as an inexpensive alternative to traditional brief intervention in primary care. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the literature on alcohol reduction apps and the availability of evidenced-based apps on top commercial app stores. Methods We reviewed literature through to December 2019 using the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar and keyword search terms smartphone/mobile/phone AND application/app AND alcohol. Articles were included if the primary intervention was a smartphone app and the study measured participant changes in frequency or volume of alcohol consumption. Results 21 relevant articles were identified that evaluated 19 unique smartphone apps. Of the 19 unique apps, seven were designed for use among youth and 12 in adult populations. The available evidence for the efficacy of alcohol reduction apps among youth is inconclusive, with results from these evaluations not showing a clear benefit in reducing alcohol consumption compared to control groups. The results of apps designed for adult populations appears more promising, but results are still mixed. Of the 19 alcohol reduction apps that have been evaluated only eight of these are currently publicly available in commercial app stores. Of these eight apps, only four were demonstrated in the literature to assist with reducing alcohol consumption. Conclusion The evidence for alcohol reduction apps is promising but inconclusive. Few apps that have been evaluated in the scientific literature are currently available for download in commercial app stores.