The aim of this study was to identify interventions targeting children and their caregivers to reduce psychosocial problems in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and comparable outbreaks. The review was performed using systematic literature searches in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and COVID-19-specific databases, including the CDC COVID-19 Research Database, the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Database on COVID-19 Research and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register and the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) up to 25th September 2020. The search yielded 6657 unique citations. After title/abstract and full text screening, 11 study protocols reporting on trials planned in China, the US, Canada, the UK, and Hungary during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Four interventions targeted children ≥10 years directly, seven system-based interventions targeted the parents and caregivers of younger children and adolescents. Outcome measures encompassed mainly anxiety and depressive symptoms, different dimensions of stress or psychosocial well-being, and quality of supportive relationships. In conclusion, this systematic review revealed a paucity of studies on psychosocial interventions for children during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further research should be encouraged in light of the expected demand for child mental health management.

Background: In recent decades, community-based interventions have been increasingly adopted in the field of health promotion and prevention. While their evaluation is relevant for health researchers, stakeholders and practitioners, conducting these evaluations is also challenging and there are no existing standards yet. The objective of this review is to scope peer-reviewed scientific publications on evaluation approaches used for community-based health promotion interventions. A special focus lies on children and adolescents’ prevention. Methods: A scoping review of the scientific literature was conducted by searching three bibliographic databases (Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO). The search strategy encompassed search terms based on the PCC (Population, Concept, Context) scheme. Out of 6,402 identified hits, 44 articles were included in this review. Results: Out of the 44 articles eligible for this scoping review, the majority reported on studies conducted in the USA (n = 28), the UK (n = 6), Canada (n = 4) and Australia (n = 2). One study each was reported from Belgium, Denmark, Germany and Scotland, respectively. The included studies described interventions that mostly focused on obesity prevention, healthy nutrition promotion or well-being of children and adolescents. Nineteen articles included more than one evaluation design (e.g., process or outcome evaluation). Therefore, in total we identified 65 study designs within the scope of this review. Outcome evaluations often included randomized controlled trials (RCTs; 34.2%) or specific forms of RCTs (cluster RCTs; 9.8%) or quasi-experimental designs (26.8%). Process evaluation was mainly used in cohort (54.2%) and cross-sectional studies (33.3%). Only few articles used established evaluation frameworks or research concepts as a basis for the evaluation. Conclusion: Few studies presented comprehensive evaluation study protocols or approaches with different study designs in one paper. Therefore, holistic evaluation approaches were difficult to retrieve from the classical publication formats. However, these publications would be helpful to further guide public health evaluators, contribute to methodological discussions and to inform stakeholders in research and practice to make decisions based on evaluation results.

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and the resulting outbreak response measures in Germany and worldwide led to severe limitations in everyday life. This affected all sorts of daily activities and the possibility for physical activity (PA), which represents a major coping strategy against stress. The objective of this study was to analyse PA in German adults during a total lockdown phase including school closures in April 2020 in certain subgroups and in relation to other coping strategies. Data from the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) survey, an online cross-sectional study with 1034 participants between 18 and 74 years, were utilised (14/15 April 2020). In addition to descriptive analyses, the odds of performing PA according to the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for adults (at least 2.5 h/week of at least moderate intensity) were analysed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. In total, 440 (42.6%) participants fulfilled this criterion. Participants with children <6 years were less likely to meet the WHO recommendation (OR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.33–0.78), while those with a higher level of education, good coping behaviour, regular alcohol consumption, and being satisfied with life were more likely to meet the WHO recommendation. In conclusion, PA intervention strategies tailored to specific vulnerable subgroups such as individuals with low educational background and parents with young children are needed in future pandemic response.

Background: Health indicators are used in different settings to monitor health outcomes. Child and adolescent health is arguably one of the most important areas for the application of indices and indicators in prevention and health promotion. Although single health indicators may be better suited to display the complexity of the health status and its determinants, a selected set of indicators will still offer a complex picture. Therefore, it is argued that a group of indicators combined into an index may offer a pragmatic tool that is easier to use in order to inform stakeholders. Methods: A scoping review was conducted to identify and describe health indices that monitor and evaluate health of children and adolescents and to appraise the quality and value of the identified indices that may guide the further applications of these indices in particular settings. The three bibliographic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched and a double screening of titles and abstracts as well as double screening of full texts was performed. Indices contained in these studies were analysed in terms of focus and composition and evaluated in terms of quality criteria. Results: The scoping review identified 36 eligible studies with 18 health indices in six thematic categories. Of the identified indices, seven indices focus on anthropometrical variables, three indices focus on special aspects of newborns and five indices focus on oral health. One index assesses “healthy lifestyle” and one “functional ability” whereas one index a combination of different aspects. Most indices are calculated by using primary health data. Conclusions: Alone or in combination with single sets of indicators, indices in six major thematic domains may be used as pragmatic tools for monitoring children’s and adolescents´ health and the evaluation of interventions in health promotion and prevention settings.

The aim of this study is to evaluate factors associated with the subjective well-being (SWB) and suspected depression measured with WHO-5 among German adults during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Survey data were analyzed from the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) study, which collected data from 972, 1013, and 973 participants in time point 1 (19–20 May 2020), time point 2 (15–16 September 2020), and time point 3 (21–22 December 2020), respectively. Descriptive analyses and logistic regression analyses to identify the factors associated with suspected depression (WHO-5 ≤ 50) were conducted. Data showed that the mean WHO-5 scores in three time points were 56.17, 57.27, and 53.93, respectively. The risk of suspected depression was increased by about 1.5 times for females, 2.5–3 times among 18–24 year-olds compared to ages above 65 years, 1.5 times for singles, 2 times for those with chronic illnesses, and 2–3 times for people living in poverty. The main study findings show that German adult SWB is lower than pre-pandemic reference values. Special focus should be placed on vulnerable groups, such as females, younger persons, and people living in poverty who are most prone to a reduction in SWB and therefore suspected depression.

Background: Logic models are valuable tools when evaluating complex interventions in public health. They can improve the understanding of how an intervention works and interacts with its system, and facilitate clear communication regarding the intervention with stakeholders. There are different approaches to developing logic models. However, experiences with logic model development in practice, and the advantages or challenges associated with different approaches are rarely reported. This study describes and reflects on the staged development process of a logic model for the municipal public health intervention Präventionskette Freiham in Munich, Germany. Specifically, we aim to identify advantages and challenges associated with this process, and deduce lessons learnt for staged logic model development and logic model development in general. Methods: For the staged logic model development process, a first draft of the logic model was developed at the start of the evaluation. We then defined a priori milestones at which the model was to be revised. It was revisited and updated: (i) after the process evaluation, (ii) after a workshop with stakeholders, and (iii) at the end of preparations for long-term outcome evaluation. We discussed the advantages and challenges associated with the staged development process in a workshop within the research team, and obtained feedback on the usefulness of the logic model during a workshop with municipal stakeholders. Results: The logic model changed in multiple aspects during the different stages of development, mostly due to evidence obtained during the evaluation and as a result of feedback from discussions within the research team and with stakeholders. In the workshop with the research team, we found the staged process to be useful for facilitating reflection, for increasing plannability of logic model development, for integrating multiple perspectives and for increasing the validity of the logic model. Challenges were the need for rigorous documentation and flexibility in the process, as well as the management of resources. In the stakeholder workshop on the usefulness of the logic model, participants stated that the graphical visualization made it easier to handle complexity, and wished for the logic model to be re-used for future interventions. Conclusions: Developing a logic model in a staged process over the course of the evaluation of an intervention is a useful approach for stimulating reflection and obtaining a more realistic depiction of the intervention.