Background: Homelessness has been associated with multiple detrimental health outcomes across observational studies. However, relatively few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted on people who experience homelessness (PEH). Thus, this umbrella review ranked the credibility of evidence derived from systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of observational studies investigating the associations between homelessness and any health outcome as well as RCTs targeting health needs in this population.Methods: Several databases were systematically searched from inception through April 28, 2021. Any SR and/or MA reporting quantitative data and providing a control group were eligible for inclusion. The credibility of the evidence derived from observational studies was appraised by considering the significance level of the association and the largest study, the degree of heterogeneity, the presence of small-study effects as well as excess significance bias. The credibility of evidence was then ranked in five classes. For SRs and/or MAs of RCTs, we considered the level of significance and whether the prediction interval crossed the null. The AMSTAR-2 and AMSTAR-plus instruments were adopted to further assess the methodological quality of SRs and/or MAs. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed to further appraise the methodological quality of prospective cohort studies only; a sensitivity analysis limited to higher quality studies was conducted.Results: Out of 1549 references, 8 MAs and 2 SRs were included. Among those considering observational studies, 23 unique associations were appraised. Twelve of them were statistically significant at thep≤0.005 level. Included cases had worst health-related outcomes than controls, but only two associations reached a priori-defined criteria for convincing (class I) evidence namely hospitalization due to any cause among PEH diagnosed with HIV infection, and the occurrence of falls within the past year among PEH. According to the AMSTAR-2 instrument, the methodological quality of all included SRs and/or MAs was “critically low.” Interventional studies were scant.Conclusion: While homelessness has been repeatedly associated with detrimental health outcomes, only two associations met the criteria for convincing evidence. Furthermore, few RCTs were appraised by SRs and/or MAs. Our umbrella review also highlights the need to standardize definitions of homelessness to be incorporated by forthcoming studies to improve the external validity of the findings in this vulnerable population.

Background: As of May 2022, Ontario has seen more than 1.3 million cases of COVID-19. While the majority of individuals will recover from infection within 4 weeks, a significant subset experience persistent and often debilitating symptoms, known as “post-COVID syndrome” or “Long COVID.” Those with Long COVID experience a wide array of symptoms, with variable severity, including fatigue, cognitive impairment, and shortness of breath. Further, the prevalence and duration of Long COVID is not clear, nor is there evidence on the best course of rehabilitation for individuals to return to their desired level of function. Previous work with chronic conditions has suggested that the addition of electronic case management (ECM) may help to improve outcomes. These platforms provide enhanced connection with care providers, detailed symptom tracking and goal setting, and access to relevant resources. In this study, our primary aim is to determine if the addition of ECM with health coaching improves Long COVID outcomes at 3 months compared to health coaching alone. Methods: The trial is an open-label, single-site, randomized controlled trial of ECM with health coaching (ECM+) compared to health coaching alone (HC). Both groups will continue to receive usual care. Participants will be randomized equally to receive health coaching (± ECM) for a period of 8 weeks and a 12-week follow-up. Our primary outcome is the WHO Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS), 36-item self-report total score. Participants will also complete measures of cognition, fatigue, breathlessness, and mental health. Participants and care providers will be asked to complete a brief qualitative interview at the end of the study to evaluate acceptability and implementation of the intervention. Discussion: There is currently little evidence about the optimal treatment of Long COVID patients or the use of digital health platforms in this population. The results of this trial could result in rapid, scalable, and personalized care for people with Long COVID which will decrease morbidity after an acute infection. Results from this study will also inform decision making in Long COVID and treatment guidelines at provincial and national levels. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05019963. Registered on 25 August 2021.

Healthcare resources are limited and unnecessary, and inappropriate emergency department use is now a highly visible healthcare priority. Individuals visiting the emergency department for mental health-related reasons are often amongst the most frequent presenters. In response, researchers and clinicians have created interventions to streamline emergency department use and several primary studies describe the effects of these interventions. Yet, no consensus exists on the optimal approach, and information on the quality of development, effectiveness, acceptability, and economic considerations is hard to find. The purpose of this study is to systematically review interventions designed to improve appropriate use of the emergency department for mental health reasons. A mixed-method systematic review using Joanna Briggs Methodology. Search combining electronic databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, PROQUEST, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health) and secondary searches (grey literature and hand search with consultation). Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts using predetermined eligibility criteria and a third reviewer will resolve conflicts. Full texts will also be screened by two independent reviews and conflicts resolved in a consensus meeting with a third reviewer. A pilot-tested data extraction form will be used to retrieve data relevant to the study objectives. We will assess the quality and of all included studies. Data describing interventions will be summarized using logic models and reported narratively. Quality of development will be assessed using the Oxford Implementation Index. For data on intervention effectiveness, we will assess statistical heterogeneity and conduct a meta-analysis using a random effects method, if appropriate. For interventions that cannot be pooled, we will report outcomes narratively and descriptively. Qualitative data on acceptability will be synthesized using meta-aggregation and an economic evaluation of interventions will be done. The reporting of this protocol follows the PRISMA-P statement. Using a combined systematic review methodology and integrated knowledge translation plan, the project will provide decision makers with concrete evidence to support the implementation and evaluation of interventions to improve emergency department use for mental health reasons. These interventions reflect widespread priorities in the area of mental health care. PROSPERO CRD42018087430

We aimed to determine the mental health and cognitive outcomes at six months in people who had not been hospitalized with COVID-19 and who had tested positive or negative for COVID-19 in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Participants were matched 1:1 six months following their COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test. X2, t-test, and Mann–Whitney U tests were conducted to compare self-report and observer-rated mental health and cognitive outcomes between the two groups. We also conducted an age and gender-adjusted logistic regression analysis to explore risk factors associated with depression, anxiety, and cognitive impairment among those who had tested positive for COVID-19. A total of 324 participants were enrolled (n = 162 per arm). Overall, 40.7% of those in the COVID-positive group were men, with an average age of 37.9 (SD 13.2) years. In the COVID-negative group, 41.4% were men, with an average age of 36.7 (SD 12.8). There were no statistically significant differences in mental health outcomes between the groups. On cognitive testing, while 21% of the COVID-positive participants and 14% of the COVID-negative participants had scores indicating significant cognitive impairment, the difference between groups was not significant, though this warrants further investigation in future research. In non-hospitalized patients who have tested positive for COVID-19, there is no evidence of an increase in mental health disorders compared to people who tested negative. Any increases in mental health disorders during the pandemic may be the effect of social changes rather than an effect of the virus itself. The exception may be the cognitive changes in those who tested positive.

While questionnaires are common ways to screen patients suspected of having sleep apnea, the “gold standard” of diagnosis by nocturnal polysomnography is not easily available in many clinical settings. This is particularly true outside of Europe and North America. Even in the latter, there are long waiting lists for assessment and the costs of polysomnography are high. In this study, we created a new screening test based on a simple physical examination that we called the Douglass gagging test (DGT). It involved the clinician pressing lightly on a seated patient’s anterior neck above the thyroid cartilage while the patient inspired deeply. Airway breath sounds were rated on a five-point scale. Using this scale with a series of 224 consecutive patients referred to an urban sleep disorders center, we successfully predicted the severity of the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) as measured by polysomnography. Using multivariate Poisson regression, the DGT was then compared to the ability of other rating scales that are based on physical examination to predict AHI: the Friedman tonsil size scale (rated 0 – 4), and the modified Mallampati scale (classes 1 – 4) which assesses visibility of the soft palate. Other predictors included sex, age, Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), and body mass index (BMI). The regression coefficients showed strong prediction of AHI by the DGT and weaker prediction by age, sex, and BMI. There was non-significant prediction by the Friedman and Mallampati scales. In conclusion, this simple test, which requires only 30 s to perform, constitutes a viable clinical screening tool for sleep apnea. It might be particularly useful in rural or underdeveloped areas where complex diagnostic equipment such as the polysomnogram is not easily available. Further investigation of the DGT in larger samples and different populations is warranted.