IntroductionPsychosocial and rehabilitation interventions are increasingly used to attenuate disability and improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) in chronic diseases, but are typically not available for patients with rare diseases. Conducting rigorous, adequately powered trials of these interventions for patients with rare diseases is difficult. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN) is an international collaboration of patient organisations, clinicians and researchers. The aim of SPIN is to develop a research infrastructure to test accessible, low-cost self-guided online interventions to reduce disability and improve HRQL for people living with the rare disease systemic sclerosis (SSc or scleroderma). Once tested, effective interventions will be made accessible through patient organisations partnering with SPIN.Methods and analysisSPIN will employ the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial (cmRCT) design, in which patients consent to participate in a cohort for ongoing data collection. The aim is to recruit 1500–2000 patients from centres across the world within a period of 5 years (2013–2018). Eligible participants are persons ≥18 years of age with a diagnosis of SSc. In addition to baseline medical data, participants will complete patient-reported outcome measures every 3 months. Upon enrolment in the cohort, patients will consent to be contacted in the future to participate in intervention research and to allow their data to be used for comparison purposes for interventions tested with other cohort participants. Once interventions are developed, patients from the cohort will be randomly selected and offered interventions as part of pragmatic RCTs. Outcomes from patients offered interventions will be compared with outcomes from trial-eligible patients who are not offered the interventions.Ethics and disseminationThe use of the cmRCT design, the development of self-guided online interventions and partnerships with patient organisations will allow SPIN to develop, rigourously test and effectively disseminate psychosocial and rehabilitation interventions for people with SSc.

No abstract

BackgroundA large proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials report statistically significant results, even in the context of very low statistical power. The objective of the present study was to characterize the reporting of “positive” results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. We also assessed mindfulness-based therapy trial registrations for indications of possible reporting bias and reviewed recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses to determine whether reporting biases were identified.MethodsCINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS databases were searched for randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based therapy. The number of positive trials was described and compared to the number that might be expected if mindfulness-based therapy were similarly effective compared to individual therapy for depression. Trial registries were searched for mindfulness-based therapy registrations. CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ISI, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and SCOPUS were also searched for mindfulness-based therapy systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Results108 (87%) of 124 published trials reported ≥1 positive outcome in the abstract, and 109 (88%) concluded that mindfulness-based therapy was effective, 1.6 times greater than the expected number of positive trials based on effect size d = 0.55 (expected number positive trials = 65.7). Of 21 trial registrations, 13 (62%) remained unpublished 30 months post-trial completion. No trial registrations adequately specified a single primary outcome measure with time of assessment. None of 36 systematic reviews and meta-analyses concluded that effect estimates were overestimated due to reporting biases.ConclusionsThe proportion of mindfulness-based therapy trials with statistically significant results may overstate what would occur in practice.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Cannabis use is the most prevalent among adolescents and young adults; frequent consumption is associated with cannabis use disorder (CUD) and psychosis, with a high prevalence (up to 50%) of CUD in individuals with first-episode psychosis (FEP). Early Intervention Services (EIS) for psychosis include face-to-face psychosocial interventions for CUD, because reducing or discontinuing cannabis use improves clinical and health care service use outcomes. However, multiple barriers (eg, staff availability and limited access to treatment) can hinder the implementation of these interventions. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions may help circumvent some of these barriers; however, to date, no study has evaluated the effects of mHealth psychological interventions for CUD in individuals with FEP. Objective This study describes the protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial using a novel mHealth psychological intervention (iCanChange [iCC]) to address CUD in young adults with FEP. iCC was developed based on clinical evidence showing that in individuals without psychosis, integrating the principles of cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing, and behavioral self-management approaches are effective in improving cannabis use–related outcomes. Methods Consenting individuals (n=100) meeting the inclusion criteria (eg, aged 18-35 years with FEP and CUD) will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention (iCC+modified EIS) or control (EIS) group. The iCC is fully automatized and contains 21 modules that are completed over a 12-week period and 3 booster modules available during the 3-month follow-up period. Validated self-report measures will be taken via in-person assessments at baseline and at 6, 12 (end point), and 24 weeks (end of trial); iCC use data will be collected directly from the mobile app. Primary outcomes are intervention completion and trial retention rates, and secondary outcomes are cannabis use quantity, participant satisfaction, app use, and trial recruiting parameters. Exploratory outcomes include severity of psychotic symptoms and CUD severity. For primary outcomes, we will use the chi-square test using data collected at week 12. We will consider participation in iCC acceptable if ≥50% of the participants complete at least 11 out of 21 intervention modules and the trial feasible if attrition does not reach 50%. We will use analysis of covariance and mixed-effects models for secondary outcomes and generalized estimating equation multivariable analyses for exploratory outcomes. Results Recruitment began in July 2022, and data collection is anticipated to be completed in July 2024. The main results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2024. We will engage patient partners and other stakeholders in creating a multifaceted knowledge translation plan to reach a diverse audience. Conclusions If feasible, this study will provide essential data for a larger-scale efficacy trial of iCC on cannabis use outcomes in individuals with FEP and CUD. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05310981; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05310981 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/40817

Background The persistence of cannabis use disorder (CUD) in young adults with first-episode psychosis (FEP) is associated with poor clinical and functional outcomes. Face-to-face psychological interventions are effective in treating CUD. However, their use in early intervention services (EISs) for psychosis is inconsistent because of barriers, including high workload and heterogeneity in training of clinicians and lack of motivation for treatment among patients. Tailoring new technology-based psychological interventions (TBPIs) to overcome these barriers is necessary to ensure their optimal acceptability. Objective The aim of this study is twofold: to explore psychological intervention practices and intervention targets that are relevant for treating CUD in individuals with early psychosis and to explore factors related to the development and implementation of a technology-assisted psychological intervention. Methods A total of 10 patients undergoing treatment for FEP and CUD in EISs participated in a focus group in June 2019. Semistructured individual interviews were conducted with 10 clinicians working in first-episode clinics in the province of Québec, Canada. A hybrid inductive-deductive approach was used to analyze data. For the deductive analysis, we used categories of promoting strategies found in the literature shown to increase adherence to web-based interventions for substance use (ie, tailoring, reminders, delivery strategies, social support, and incentives). For the inductive analysis, we identified new themes through an iterative process of reviewing the data multiple times by two independent reviewers. Results Data were synthesized into five categories of factors that emerged from data collection, and a narrative synthesis of commonalities and differences between patient and clinician perspectives was produced. The categories included attitudes and beliefs related to psychological interventions (eg, behavioral stage of change), strategies for psychological interventions (eg, motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, stress management), incentives (eg, contingency management), general interest in TBPIs (eg, facilitators and barriers of TBPIs), and tailoring of TBPIs (eg, application needs and preferences, outcome measures of interest for clinicians). Conclusions This study provides a comprehensive portrait of the multifaceted needs and preferences of patients and clinicians related to TBPIs. Our results can inform the development of smartphone- or web-based psychological interventions for CUD in young adults with early psychosis.

No abstract