Aims: Secondary prevention reduces coronary heart disease (CHD) progression. Traditional prevention programs including cardiac rehabilitation are under-accessed, which smartphone apps may overcome. To evaluate the effect of a game-based mobile app intervention (MyHeartMate) to improve cardiovascular risk factors and lifestyle behaviours. Methods and results: Single-blind randomized trial of CHD patients in Sydney, 2017–2021. Intervention group were provided the MyHeartMate app for 6 months. Co-designed features included an avatar of the patient’s heart and tokens earned by risk factor work (tracking, challenges, and quizzes). The control group received usual care. Primary outcome was self-reported physical activity [metabolic equivalents (METs), Global Physical Activity Questionnaire] and secondary outcomes included lipid levels, blood pressure (BP), body mass index, and smoking. Pre-specified sample size was achieved (n = 390), age 61.2 ± 11.5 years; 82.5% men and 9.2% current smokers. At 6 months, adjusted for baseline levels, the intervention group achieved more physical activity than control (median difference 329 MET mins/wk), which was not statistically significant (95% CI −37.4, 696; P = 0.064). No differences occurred between groups on secondary outcomes except for lower triglyceride levels in the intervention [mean difference −0.3 (95% CI −0.5, −0.1 mmoL/L, P = 0.004)]. Acceptability was high: 94.8% of intervention participants engaged by tracking exercise or BP and completing missions; 26.8% continued to engage for ≥30 days. Participants (n = 14) reported the app supported tracking behaviours and risk factors, reinforcing and improving self-care confidence, and decreasing anxiety. Conclusion: A game-based app proved highly acceptable for patients with CHD but did not improve risk factors or lifestyle behaviours other than triglyceride levels.

To evaluate the digital platforms most used by adolescents for healthy lifestyle information, perceived helpfulness of platform information, helpfulness for positive behaviour changes, and quality of platforms’ lifestyle health information. Mixed-methods study including a cross-sectional online survey and content analysis. Eligible participants were 13–18-years; living in Australia; and had searched online for healthy lifestyle behaviour (nutrition, physical activity, weight management, sleep) information in the previous three months. Survey items examined the use of digital platforms, self-perceived helpfulness, usefulness for positive behaviour, and popular content. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression models. Content analysis was performed on popular digital content to evaluate expertise, objectivity, transparency, popularity, and relevance. In total, 297 participants completed the survey (62.3% female; 15.8 [SD1.5] years). Seventy-eight percent and 77% of participants reported using websites and social media, respectively, for seeking healthy lifestyle information. Websites and social media were rated as somewhat helpful by 43% and 46% of participants, respectively. Sixty-six percent and 53% of participants agreed/strongly agreed smartphone apps and social media were helpful for positive behaviour change, respectively. Helpfulness did not differ by age or gender. We evaluated 582 popular digital content; 38% were produced by a commercial company. Only 7% of content was from health organisations, 10% from health professionals and only 10% of content was objective, and 14% was transparent. Adolescents extensively utilise websites and social media for health information, yet popular content has limited objectivity and transparency. Governments and health organisations should consider creating age-appropriate digital information for healthy lifestyle behaviours.

Introduction A diagnosis of melanoma in situ presents negligible risk to a person’s lifespan or physical well-being, but existing terminology makes it difficult for patients to distinguish these from higher risk invasive melanomas. This study aims to explore whether using an alternative label for melanoma in situ may influence patients’ management choices and anxiety levels. Methods and analysis This study is a between-subjects randomised online experiment, using hypothetical scenarios. Following consent, eligible participants will be randomised 1:1:1 to three labels: ‘melanoma in situ’ (control), ‘low-risk melanocytic neoplasm’ (intervention 1) and ‘low-risk melanocytic neoplasm, in situ’ (intervention 2). The required sample size is 1668 people. The co-primary outcomes are (1) choice between no further surgery or further surgery to ensure clear histological margins greater than 5 mm and (2) choice between patient-initiated clinical follow-up when needed (patient-led surveillance) and regular routinely scheduled clinical follow-up (clinician-led surveillance). Secondary outcomes include diagnosis anxiety, perceived risk of invasive melanoma and of dying from melanoma and management choice anxiety (after surgery choice and follow-up choice). We will make pairwise comparisons across the three diagnostic label groups using regression models (univariable and multivariable). Ethics and dissemination The study has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12624000740594). Ethics approval has been received from The University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (2024/HE000019). The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, and a plain language summary of the findings will be shared on the Wiser Healthcare publication page (https://www.wiserhealthcare.org.au/category/publications/). Trial registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ID 386943).

Objective: This study aimed to design a valid questionnaire to evaluate knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of Mashhad Dental school staff about oral health care and to assess the validity and reliability of this instrument. Methods: The "Dental Staff Awareness of Oral Health Care” (DSAOHC) was divided into three concepts; knowledge, attitude and practice. Ten experts of Mashhad Dental School contributed to design the questionnaire and assessed the face and content validity (I-CVI and S-CVI/AV) in two rounds. The necessity of each item was evaluated according to Lawshe’s Content Validity Ratio (CVR). Construct validity, internal consistency, and reliability were assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, homogeneity coefficients, and test-retest by distributing the instrument among 207 dental staff working in other dental schools and private clinics. Results: Based on the acceptable results of I-CVI, S-CVI/AV (>0.7), and CVR (> 0.62), the final version of DSAOHC was approved with 34 questions, including 10 questions about background information, 8 questions for the knowledge, 5 questions for attitude and 11 questions related to practice. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were acceptable for all domains. The RMSEA criterion was ≤ 0.05 and its upper band confidence interval (CI 90%) was ≤ 0.1. Also, CFI indicated the suitability of the model (the desired value of CFI> 0.9). Inter-Class Correlation/ICC revealed the appropriate measure (ICC=0.998). Conclusion: The measures showed that this instrument is valid and reliable, also culturally adjusted to and acceptable for this community. It may adequately evaluate staffs’ knowledge, attitude, and practice toward oral health.

Introduction Many types of prostate cancer present minimal risk to a man’s lifespan or well-being, but existing terminology makes it difficult for men to distinguish these from high-risk prostate cancers. This study aims to explore whether using an alternative label for low-risk prostate cancer influences management choice and anxiety levels among Australian men and their partners. Methods and analysis We will run two separate studies for Australian men and Australian women with a male partner. Both studies are between-subjects factorial (3×2) randomised online hypothetical experiments. Following consent, eligible participants will be randomised 1:1:1 to three labels: ‘low-risk prostate cancer, Gleason Group 1’, ‘low-risk prostate neoplasm’ or ‘low-risk prostate lesion’. Participants will then undergo a second randomisation step with 1:1 allocation to the provision of detailed information on the benefits and harms of different management choices versus the provision of less detailed information about management choices. The required sample sizes are 1290 men and 1410 women. The primary outcome is the participant choice of their preferred management strategy: no immediate treatment (prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based monitoring or active surveillance using PSA, MRI, biopsy with delayed treatment for disease progression) versus immediate treatment (prostatectomy or radiation therapy). Secondary outcomes include preferred management choice (from the four options listed above), diagnosis anxiety, management choice anxiety and management choice at a later time point (for participants who initially choose a monitoring strategy). Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval has been received from The University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/572). The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal and a plain language summary of the findings will be shared on the Wiser Healthcare publications page http://www.wiserhealthcare.org.au/category/publications/ Trial registration numbers Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ID 386701 and 386889).

This is the second article in a 2-part series on survival analysis. In part 1, we discussed the core concepts and traditional methods used in survival analysis. Part 2 explores the novel approaches to predict survival outcomes and evaluate model performance. To facilitate hands-on learning and practical implementation, the R code used in these analyses is provided in the supplementary materials, along with instructions to help readers apply these methods to their data.