ObjectiveInvestigate the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on feelings of loneliness and social isolation in parents of school-age children.DesignCross-sectional online survey of parents of primary and secondary school-age children.SettingCommunity setting.Participants1214 parents of school-age children in the UK.MethodsAn online survey explored the impact of lockdown on the mental health of parents with school-age children, and in particular about feelings of social isolation and loneliness. Associations between the UCLA Three-Item Loneliness Scale (UCLATILS), the Direct Measure of Loneliness (DMOL) and the characteristics of the study participants were assessed using ordinal logistic regression models.Main outcome measuresSelf-reported measures of social isolation and loneliness using UCLATILS and DMOL.ResultsHalf of respondents felt they lacked companionship, 45% had feelings of being left out, 58% felt isolated and 46% felt lonely during the first 100 days of lockdown. The factors that were associated with higher levels of loneliness on UCLATILS were female gender, parenting a child with special needs, lack of a dedicated space for distance learning, disruption of sleep patterns and low levels of physical activity during the lockdown. Factors associated with a higher DMOL were female gender, single parenting, parenting a child with special needs, unemployment, low physical activity, lack of a dedicated study space and disruption of sleep patterns during the lockdown.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 lockdown has increased feelings of social isolation and loneliness among parents of school-age children. The sustained adoption of two modifiable health-seeking lifestyle behaviours (increased levels of physical activity and the maintenance of good sleep hygiene practices) wmay help reduce feelings of social isolation and loneliness during lockdown.

ObjectiveAssess the suitability of clinical vignettes in benchmarking the performance of online symptom checkers (OSCs).DesignObservational study using a publicly available free OSC.ParticipantsHealthily OSC, which provided consultations in English, was used to record consultation outcomes from two lay and four expert inputters using 139 standardised patient vignettes. Each vignette included three diagnostic solutions and a triage recommendation in one of three categories of triage urgency. A panel of three independent general practitioners interpreted the vignettes to arrive at an alternative set of diagnostic and triage solutions. Both sets of diagnostic and triage solutions were consolidated to arrive at a final consolidated version for benchmarking.Main outcome measuresSix inputters simulated 834 standardised patient evaluations using Healthily OSC and recorded outputs (triage solution, signposting, and whether the correct diagnostic solution appeared first or within the first three differentials). We estimated Cohen’s kappa to assess how interpretations by different inputters could lead to divergent OSC output even when using the same vignette or when compared with a separate panel of physicians.ResultsThere was moderate agreement on triage recommendation (kappa=0.48), and substantial agreement on consultation outcomes between all inputters (kappa=0.73). OSC performance improved significantly from baseline when compared against the final consolidated diagnostic and triage solution (p<0.001).ConclusionsClinical vignettes are inherently limited in their utility to benchmark the diagnostic accuracy or triage safety of OSC. Real-world evidence studies involving real patients are recommended to benchmark the performance of OSC against a panel of physicians.

Background In the context of a deepening global shortage of health workers and, in particular, the COVID-19 pandemic, there is growing international interest in, and use of, online symptom checkers (OSCs). However, the evidence surrounding the triage and diagnostic accuracy of these tools remains inconclusive. Objective This systematic review aimed to summarize the existing peer-reviewed literature evaluating the triage accuracy (directing users to appropriate services based on their presenting symptoms) and diagnostic accuracy of OSCs aimed at lay users for general health concerns. Methods Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), and Web of Science, as well as the citations of the studies selected for full-text screening. We included peer-reviewed studies published in English between January 1, 2010, and February 16, 2022, with a controlled and quantitative assessment of either or both triage and diagnostic accuracy of OSCs directed at lay users. We excluded tools supporting health care professionals, as well as disease- or specialty-specific OSCs. Screening and data extraction were carried out independently by 2 reviewers for each study. We performed a descriptive narrative synthesis. Results A total of 21,296 studies were identified, of which 14 (0.07%) were included. The included studies used clinical vignettes, medical records, or direct input by patients. Of the 14 studies, 6 (43%) reported on triage and diagnostic accuracy, 7 (50%) focused on triage accuracy, and 1 (7%) focused on diagnostic accuracy. These outcomes were assessed based on the diagnostic and triage recommendations attached to the vignette in the case of vignette studies or on those provided by nurses or general practitioners, including through face-to-face and telephone consultations. Both diagnostic accuracy and triage accuracy varied greatly among OSCs. Overall diagnostic accuracy was deemed to be low and was almost always lower than that of the comparator. Similarly, most of the studies (9/13, 69 %) showed suboptimal triage accuracy overall, with a few exceptions (4/13, 31%). The main variables affecting the levels of diagnostic and triage accuracy were the severity and urgency of the condition, the use of artificial intelligence algorithms, and demographic questions. However, the impact of each variable differed across tools and studies, making it difficult to draw any solid conclusions. All included studies had at least one area with unclear risk of bias according to the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Conclusions Although OSCs have potential to provide accessible and accurate health advice and triage recommendations to users, more research is needed to validate their triage and diagnostic accuracy before widescale adoption in community and health care settings. Future studies should aim to use a common methodology and agreed standard for evaluation to facilitate objective benchmarking and validation. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42020215210; https://tinyurl.com/3949zw83

BACKGROUND In the context of a deepening global shortage of health workers, and particularly the COVID-19 pandemic, there is growing international interest in and use of online symptom checkers (OSCs). However, the evidence surrounding the safety and accuracy of OSCs remains inconclusive so far. The triage and diagnostic accuracy of these tools is an essential aspect that needs to be addressed before pushing any further implementation. OBJECTIVE This systematic review aimed to summarize the existing peer-reviewed literature evaluating the triage accuracy (directing users to appropriate services based on their presenting symptoms) and diagnostic accuracy of OSCs aimed at lay users for general health concerns. METHODS Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, HMIC and Web of Science. We included peer-reviewed studies published in English between 1 January 2010 and 17 February 2022 with a quantitative assessment of triage and/or diagnostic accuracy of OSCs directed at lay users. We excluded tools supporting health professionals, and disease- or speciality-specific OSCs. Screening and data extraction were carried out independently by two reviewers for each study. We performed a descriptive narrative synthesis. RESULTS 21,284 studies were screened and 15 were included. Six studies reported on both triage and diagnostic accuracy, eight focused on triage accuracy, and one on diagnostic accuracy. Diagnostic and triage accuracy varied between studies and OSCs; most studies showed suboptimal diagnostic and triage accuracy. Frequency and urgency of the condition were the main variables that affected the levels of diagnostic and triage accuracy, along with specific features of the OSCs. The impact of each variable differed across tools and studies, making it difficult to draw any solid conclusions. Included studies had either a moderate or high risk of bias according to the revised tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2. CONCLUSIONS While OSCs have significant potential to provide accessible and accurate health advice and triage recommendations to users, more research is needed to validate their triage and diagnostic accuracy prior to wide scale adoption in community and healthcare settings. Future studies should aim to use a common methodology and/or agreed standard for evaluation to facilitate objective benchmarking and validation.

Background Various instruments are used to measure individual self-care capability for healthy individuals, those experiencing everyday self-limiting conditions, or one or more multiple long-term conditions. Objective Identify and characterise self-care measurement tools that are designed for adults. We also sought to assess the extent to which each item of the instruments identified could be mapped to the Seven Pillars of Self-Care (7PSC) framework. Design Systematic scoping review with thematic content analysis. Methods We conducted a systematic scoping review of the literature to identify instruments that could be used to assess self-care behaviours among the general population. The search was conducted in Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases using a variety of MeSH terms and keywords covering 1 January 1950 to 30 November 2022. Inclusion criteria included tools assessing health literacy, capability and/or performance of general health self-care practices and targeting adults. We excluded tools targeting self-care in the context of disease management only or indicated to a specific medical setting or theme. Results We identified 38 tools. Descriptive analysis highlighted a shift in the overall emphasis from rehabilitation-focused to prevention-focused tools. The intended method of administration also transitioned from observe-and-interview style methods to the utilisation of self-reporting tools. Only five tools incorporated questions relevant to 7PSC. Conclusions Self-care can play a crucial role in the prevention, management and rehabilitation of diverse conditions, especially chronic non-communicable diseases. There is a need for the development of a comprehensive measurement tool that could be used to evaluate individual self-care capacity and capability.