Background: Gender is increasingly recognised as a critical factor in designing community-based health promotion programmes. Men’s Sheds (‘Sheds’) are community-based informal environments that represent a safe space in which to engage cohorts of hard-to-reach (HTR) men in health promotion. Sheds for Life (SFL), the first structured health promotion initiative evaluated globally in Sheds, is a 10-week initiative co-designed with Shed Members (Shedders) and delivered directly in the Shed setting in Ireland. This research describes the health and wellbeing outcomes experienced by SFL participants. Methods: Purposive sampling was used to recruit a diverse representation of Shedders (n = 421) participating in SFL alongside a wait list control (n = 86). Questionnaires assessing constructs of health and wellbeing were administered one-to-one in Sheds at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. Descriptive data for health outcomes were generated for each time point and assessed for significant changes using inferential testing, while considering COVID-19 impact. Results: Outcomes related to subjective wellbeing, mental wellbeing, physical activity, social capital and healthy eating significantly increased post SFL (p < 0.05). Mental wellbeing scores (SWEMWBS) post SFL remained significantly higher than baseline despite COVID-19 impact (p < 0.05). Binary logistic regression indicated that the odds of a meaningful SWEMWBS change was significantly higher for shedders that had lower SWEMWBS (OR 0.804), less loneliness (OR 0.638) and lived alone (OR 0.456) at baseline. Shedders with lower SWEMBWS had higher odds of experiencing positive changes in life satisfaction (OR 0.911) and trust (OR 0.928), while Shedders who lived alone had also higher odds of experience positive changes in healthy eating (OR 0.481). Finally, inactive Shedders at baseline had higher odds of experiencing increased levels of physical activity (OR 0.582). Conclusions: Findings suggest that the inclusive, community-based SFL model is effective in engaging Shedders and facilitating positive and sustained changes in health and wellbeing outcomes. Using gender-specific approaches in the informal and safe environment of the Shed are effective in engaging men in structured health and wellbeing initiatives, particularly those who may be more vulnerable, isolated or lonely. Trial registration: This study has been retrospectively registered with the ‘International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number’ registry (ISRCTN79921361) as of 05/03/2021.

Summary: COVID-19 disproportionately affects males especially those who are older and more socio-economically disadvantaged. This study assessed wellbeing outcomes among men’s shed members (Shedders) in Ireland at baseline (T1), 3 (T2), 6 (T3) and 12 months (T4) in response to a 10-week health promotion program ‘Sheds for Life’ (SFL). Two cohorts participated in SFL commencing in March and September 2019. This study compares the T3 findings from one cohort carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic [COVID cohort (n = 185)] with T3 findings from a comparator cohort [pre-COVID cohort (n = 195)], completed pre-COVID-19. Questionnaires assessing wellbeing [life satisfaction, mental health, loneliness, physical activity (PA), self-rated health and other lifestyle measures] were analyzed in both cohorts T1, T2 and T3. Self-rated Health and life satisfaction decreased in the COVID cohort at T3 (p < 0.001), while loneliness scores increased (p < 0.0005). Higher loneliness scores were correlated with lower health ratings, life satisfaction and PA during COVID-19 (p < 0.001). Days PA decreased in the COVID cluster at T3 from T2 (p < 0.01) with those in urban areas reporting lower activity levels than rural areas (p < 0.05). Those sufficiently active at baseline managed to maintain PA during COVID-19 while those not meeting guidelines were more likely to report decreases (p < 0.001). Shedders experiencing COVID-19 restrictions are at an increased risk of poorer wellbeing and increased levels of loneliness. Support and guidance are needed to safely encourage this cohort back into men’s sheds, settings that protect against loneliness and positively promote health and wellbeing. Lay summary The COVID-19 pandemic will have wide-reaching implications on wellbeing, particularly on those who are older and more vulnerable. Evidence also suggests that COVID-19 disproportionately affects males. This study aimed to understand the impact that COVID-19 has had on men in the setting of Men’s Sheds in Ireland. Two cohorts of men who were participating in a 10-week health and wellbeing program (Sheds for Life) at different stages were followed over time. At 6 months follow-up the first Cohort had not experienced COVID-19 whereas the second cohort was actively experiencing the COVID-19 pandemic. We measured wellbeing using questionnaires, comparing both groups of men for differences. We found that the men who were experiencing COVID-19 had lower self-rated health, physical activity and life satisfaction as well as higher rates of loneliness, with those who were more lonely reporting lower wellbeing scores. We also found that men in rural areas were more physically active during COVID-19 and that those were not active were more likely to become more inactive during COVID-19. This study suggests that support and guidance is needed to safely encourage this cohort back into Men’s Sheds, settings that protect against loneliness and positively promote health and wellbeing.

This study sought to explore the relationship between sociodemographic-, mental health-, knowledge-, attitudinal-, and conformity to masculine norms variables with suicide literacy, suicide stigma, and help-seeking attitudes among men in a university setting (n = 471) in Ireland. Multiple linear regression with backward elimination was used to determine the independent variables associated with suicide literacy, suicide stigma, and help-seeking attitudes. Lower suicide literacy was associated with an ethnic minority background, living in a rural community, postgraduate students compared to undergraduate students, no depression symptoms in the past year, decreasing loneliness, greater suicide stigma, more negative help-seeking attitudes, lower resilience, greater conformity to the masculine norm power over women and lower conformity to the masculine norm emotional control. Greater suicide stigma was associated with a non-ethnic minority background, all departments of study compared to health and sports science, lower suicide literacy, more negative help-seeking attitudes, and greater conformity to the masculine norms of power over women, dominance, and heterosexual self-presentation. More negative help-seeking attitudes were associated with no generalized anxiety disorder symptoms in the past year, depression symptoms in the past year, greater suicide risk, lower suicide literacy, greater suicide stigma, greater resilience, and greater conformity to the masculine norms emotional control, self-reliance, violence, and heterosexual self-presentation. Findings highlight a need for gender-responsive psychoeducational programmes to target suicide literacy, suicide stigma, and/or help-seeking attitudes among men in university settings. They also highlight that such initiatives need to be co-produced alongside ethnic minority and rural-dwelling men to ensure they are culturally sensitive and acceptable.

Research has highlighted the importance of gendered approaches to engage men with health. Sheds for Life (SFL) is a health and wellbeing initiative that utilizes evidence-based and gender-specific approaches to engage hard to reach men with health promotion directly in the Men’s Sheds (Sheds) setting. To understand the impact of SFL and how participants (Shedders) experienced SFL in practice, this qualitative study applied a framework of constructivism and aimed to explore how gendered approaches impacted engagement with SFL through Shedder’s own accounts of their attitudes, opinions and experiences. Qualitative methods incorporating ethnographical observations, focus groups (n = 8) and short semi-structured interviews (n = 19) were conducted with SFL participants in the Shed setting. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data to faithfully capture Shedders’ experiences while acknowledging the reflexive influence of the researcher. Findings led to three key themes: Creating the ‘right environment’; Normalizing meaningful conversations; a legacy for ‘talking health’ with subthemes of creating safety and trust and strengthening of bonds; and transforming perceptions of how men ‘do health’ with subthemes of reaping the benefits of engaging with health and reframing attitudes towards health. This is first study to capture Shedders’ experiences of a structured health promotion initiative in the Shed setting. Findings highlight the value in utilizing the Shed setting to engage men with health and the importance of gender-specific strategies which encourage a gender-transformative approach to men’s health promotion.

Background: Men’s Sheds (“Sheds”) offer a unique opportunity to reach a captive audience of “hard-to-reach” men. However, attempts to engage Sheds in structured health promotion programmes must respect the ethos of Sheds as highly variable, autonomous, non-structured spaces. This paper captures the key methodologies used in “Sheds for Life’ (SFL), a men’s health initiative tailored to the Shed setting. Methods: A hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design is used to test effectiveness and implementation outcomes across multiple levels (participant, provider, organisational and systems levels). A dynamic, iterative and collaborative process seeks to address barriers and translation into the real world context. Using a community-based participatory research approach and guided by established implementation frameworks, Shed members (‘Shedders’) assume the role of key decision makers throughout the evaluation process to promote the systematic uptake of SFL across Shed settings. The protocols pertaining to the development, design and implementation of SFL and the evaluation of impact on participants’ health and wellbeing outcomes up to 12 months are outlined. Conclusions: There is a dynamic interplay between the intervention characteristics of SFL and the need to assess and understand the diverse contexts of Sheds and the wider implementation environment. A pragmatic and context-specific design is therefore favoured over a tightly controlled efficacy trial. Documenting the protocols used to evaluate and implement a complex multi-level co-developed intervention such as SFL helps to inform gender-specific, community-based men’s health promotion and translational research more broadly. Trial registration: This study has been retrospectively registered with the ‘International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number’ registry (ISRCTN79921361) as of the 5th of March 2021.