Background: Physical inactivity is a key contributor to the global burden of disease and disproportionately impacts the wellbeing of people experiencing mental illness. Increases in physical activity are associated with improvements in symptoms of mental illness and reduction in cardiometabolic risk. Reliable and valid clinical tools that assess physical activity would improve evaluation of intervention studies that aim to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour in people living with mental illness. Methods: The five-item Simple Physical Activity Questionnaire (SIMPAQ) was developed by a multidisciplinary, international working group as a clinical tool to assess physical activity and sedentary behaviour in people living with mental illness. Patients with a DSM or ICD mental illness diagnoses were recruited and completed the SIMPAQ on two occasions, one week apart. Participants wore an Actigraph accelerometer and completed brief cognitive and clinical assessments. Results: Evidence of SIMPAQ validity was assessed against accelerometer-derived measures of physical activity. Data were obtained from 1010 participants. The SIMPAQ had good test-retest reliability. Correlations for moderatevigorous physical activity was comparable to studies conducted in general population samples. Evidence of validity for the sedentary behaviour item was poor. An alternative method to calculate sedentary behaviour had stronger evidence of validity. This alternative method is recommended for use in future studies employing the SIMPAQ. Conclusions: The SIMPAQ is a brief measure of physical activity and sedentary behaviour that can be reliably and validly administered by health professionals.

No abstract

No abstract

Mass Drug Administration (MDA) for Lymphatic Filariasis (LF) elimination has been implemented worldwide and in India with a goal of eliminating the disease by 2020 and 2015 respectively. Compliance to MDA is less than adequate to achieve the goal in the desired time. This study aims to identify the factors related to awareness, acceptability and attitude and the role of certain theoretical constructs of health belief model in determining the compliant behavior to MDA. Within a cross-sectional study done in Thiruvananthapuram district of Kerala, India, undertaken to determine coverage, a comparison was done between compliant and noncompliant individuals. 300 households were selected using cluster sampling technique, for estimation of coverage of MDA. From these households, 99 noncompliant and 70 compliant individuals were selected as cases and controls. The independent factors determining noncompliance were client attitude of not perceiving the need with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 2.52 (1.29-4.92), an unfavorable provider attitude with an adjusted OR of 2.14 (1.05-4.35) and low drug administrator acceptability with an adjusted OR of 2.01 (1.01-3.99). In MDA, the person giving the drug to the beneficiary is the most important person, whose attitude and acceptability determines compliance. More rigorous selection and training for capacity building of drug administrators are essential to enhance the compliance level. Alternate drug delivery strategies, besides house to house campaign by voluntary drug administers also needs to be implemented.

Background The primary objective of this study was to find the performance of the 2009 probable case definition of dengue and compare it with the definition given by the WHO-SEAR expert group in 2011. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in Thiruvananthapuram district of Kerala, which is hyperendemic for dengue. A consecutive series of 851 participants defined by the selection criteria were recruited from the primary, secondary, and tertiary health care settings. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios of the clinical case definitions were calculated using reverse transcriptasepolymerized chain reaction (RT-PCR) as gold standard in case of fever less than or equal to 5 days and serology (IgM positivity) for fever .5 days. Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was also calculated as a single indicator of performance of the case definition. Results The 2009 World Health Organization (WHO) case definition had a sensitivity of 76.4% (69.6-82.1) and negative predictive value of 87.5%. The 2011 WHO-SEAR expert group case definition had a higher sensitivity of 87.9% (82.2-91.9) but lower negative predictive value of 86.6%. The three independent criteria which were significantly associated with dengue were thrombocytopenia less than 150 000 (OR 2.80), leukopenia (OR 2.28), and absence of backache (OR 2.68). The performance of 2009 case definition was better (DOR 2.4) than the 2011 WHO-SEAR expert group case definition. This was further enhanced when thrombocytopenia was specified as platelet count less than 150 000 (DOR2.7). When 'no backahe' was added as an additional criteria, the performance of both definitions improved. Conclusions The 2009 WHO case definition has better discriminatory power than the 2011 WHO-SEAR expert group case definition. The performance of 2009 WHO case definition is enhanced by specifying thrombocytopenia as platelet count less than 150 000. The inclusion of 'no backache' further improves the discriminatory power. This may be more useful in primary care settings, to rule out dengue.