Background and aims: Sepsis is a serious and life-threatening condition caused by a dysregulated immune response to an infection. Recent guidance issued in the UK gave recommendations around recognition and antibiotic treatment of sepsis, but did not consider factors relating to health inequalities. The aim of this study was to summarise the literature investigating associations between health inequalities and sepsis. Methods: Searches were conducted in Embase for peer-reviewed articles published since 2010 that included sepsis in combination with one of the following five areas: socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, community factors, medical needs and pregnancy/maternity. Results: Five searches identified 1,402 studies, with 50 unique studies included in the review after screening (13 sociodemographic, 14 race/ethnicity, 3 community, 3 care/medical needs and 20 pregnancy/maternity; 3 papers examined multiple health inequalities). Most of the studies were conducted in the USA (31/50), with only four studies using UK data (all pregnancy related). Socioeconomic factors associated with increased sepsis incidence included lower socioeconomic status, unemployment and lower education level, although findings were not consistent across studies. For ethnicity, mixed results were reported. Living in a medically underserved area or being resident in a nursing home increased risk of sepsis. Mortality rates after sepsis were found to be higher in people living in rural areas or in those discharged to skilled nursing facilities while associations with ethnicity were mixed. Complications during delivery, caesarean-section delivery, increased deprivation and black and other ethnic minority race were associated with post-partum sepsis. Conclusion: There are clear correlations between sepsis morbidity and mortality and the presence of factors associated with health inequalities. To inform local guidance and drive public health measures, there is a need for studies conducted across more diverse setting and countries.

There is increasing use of digital tools to monitor people with psychosis and schizophrenia remotely, but using this type of data is challenging. This systematic review aimed to summarise how studies processed and analysed data collected through digital devices. In total, 203 articles collecting passive data through smartphones or wearable devices, from participants with psychosis or schizophrenia were included in the review. Accelerometers were the most common device (n = 115 studies), followed by smartphones (n = 46). The most commonly derived features were sleep duration (n = 50) and time spent sedentary (n = 41). Thirty studies assessed data quality and another 69 applied data quantity thresholds. Mixed effects models were used in 21 studies and time-series and machine-learning methods were used in 18 studies. Reporting of methods to process and analyse data was inconsistent, highlighting a need to improve the standardisation of methods and reporting in this area of research.

Sepsis, characterised by significant morbidity and mortality, is intricately linked to socioeconomic disparities and pre-admission clinical histories. This study aspires to elucidate the association between non-COVID-19 related sepsis and health inequality risk factors amidst the pandemic in England, with a secondary focus on their association with 30-day sepsis mortality. With the approval of NHS England, we harnessed the OpenSAFELY platform to execute a cohort study and a 1:6 matched case-control study. A sepsis diagnosis was identified from the incident hospital admissions record using ICD-10 codes. This encompassed 248,767 cases with non-COVID-19 sepsis from a cohort of 22.0 million individuals spanning January 1, 2019, to June 31, 2022. Socioeconomic deprivation was gauged using the Index of Multiple Deprivation score, reflecting indicators like income, employment, and education. Hospitalisation-related sepsis diagnoses were categorised as community-acquired or hospital-acquired. Cases were matched to controls who had no recorded diagnosis of sepsis, based on age (stepwise), sex, and calendar month. The eligibility criteria for controls were established primarily on the absence of a recorded sepsis diagnosis. Associations between potential predictors and odds of developing non-COVID-19 sepsis underwent assessment through conditional logistic regression models, with multivariable regression determining odds ratios (ORs) for 30-day mortality. The study included 224,361 (10.2%) cases with non-COVID-19 sepsis and 1,346,166 matched controls. The most socioeconomic deprived quintile was associated with higher odds of developing non-COVID-19 sepsis than the least deprived quintile (crude OR 1.80 [95% CI 1.77-1.83]). Other risk factors (after adjusting comorbidities) such as learning disability (adjusted OR 3.53 [3.35-3.73]), chronic liver disease (adjusted OR 3.08 [2.97-3.19]), chronic kidney disease (stage 4: adjusted OR 2.62 [2.55-2.70], stage 5: adjusted OR 6.23 [5.81-6.69]), cancer, neurological disease, immunosuppressive conditions were also associated with developing non-COVID-19 sepsis. The incidence rate of non-COVID-19 sepsis decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and rebounded to pre-pandemic levels (April 2021) after national lockdowns had been lifted. The 30-day mortality risk in cases with non-COVID-19 sepsis was higher for the most deprived quintile across all periods. Socioeconomic deprivation, comorbidity and learning disabilities were associated with an increased odds of developing non-COVID-19 related sepsis and 30-day mortality in England. This study highlights the need to improve the prevention of sepsis, including more precise targeting of antimicrobials to higher-risk patients. The UK Health Security Agency, Health Data Research UK, and National Institute for Health Research.

Population pharmacokinetic studies of β-lactam antimicrobials in critically ill patients derive models that inform their dosing. In non-linear mixed-effects modelling, covariates are often used to improve model fit and explain variability. We aimed to investigate which covariates are most commonly assessed and which are found to be significant, along with global patterns of publication. We conducted a systematic review, searching MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and Web of Science on 01 March 2023, including studies of critically ill adults receiving β-lactam antimicrobials who underwent blood sampling for population pharmacokinetic studies. We extracted and categorized all reported covariates and assessed reporting quality using the ClinPK checklist. Our search identified 151 studies with 6018 participants. Most studies reported observational cohorts (120 studies, 80%), with the majority conducted in high-income settings (136 studies, 90%). Of the 1083 identified covariate instances, 237 were unique; the most common categories were patient characteristics (n = 404), biomarkers (n = 206) and physiological parameters (n = 163). Only seven distinct commonly reported covariates (CL_CR, weight, glomerular filtration rate, diuresis, need for renal replacement, serum albumin and C-reactive protein) were significant more than 20% of the time. Covariates are most commonly chosen based on biological plausibility, with patient characteristics and biomarkers the most frequently investigated. We developed an openly accessible database of reported covariates to aid investigators with covariate selection when designing population pharmacokinetic studies. Novel covariates, such as sepsis subphenotypes, have not been explored yet, leaving a research gap for future work.

Digital remote monitoring technologies, including smartphones and wearables, offer promising avenues for early detection of psychosis relapse. However, selecting devices that are acceptable to participants and produce high-quality data remains challenging. The aim of this nested pilot study was to assess the acceptability and data quality of 3 commercially available wearable devices in people with psychosis recruited to the CONNECT cohort study. Participants recruited to the CONNECT study before July 31, 2024, were included in the pilot study and selected 1 of 3 wearable devices: a Fitbit Charge 5, Samsung Galaxy Watch 5, or Apple Watch SE. Baseline demographics were compared between device groups. Acceptability of devices to participants was assessed through a Wearable Device Satisfaction Questionnaire after 3 months of use, with the proportion of positive responses to each question calculated and compared. Data completeness was also assessed by calculating the number (and percentage) of valid days of step count, heart rate, and sleep data, and comparing between groups. Data quality was assessed through summarizing the amount of troubleshooting required, additional metrics available from the wearables, and continuity of data completeness by calculating the proportion of participants with at least 3 days of heart rate data per week for the first 20 weeks of follow-up. Predefined criteria were used to determine the next steps for the wider CONNECT study: if one device was superior, this would be selected; if none were found to be superior and the Fitbit was found to be noninferior, then Fitbit would be retained. Of the first 107 participants recruited to CONNECT, 105 were included in the pilot study evaluation. The Samsung Galaxy Watch was selected most frequently by participants (46/105, 43.8%), followed by the Apple Watch (27/105, 25.7%), and Fitbit Charge (23/105, 21.9%). Differences in participant demographics were observed across device groups. Self-reported acceptability after use did not differ substantially between devices. However, in terms of data completeness, the median proportion of valid heart rate data days was significantly lower for Samsung Galaxy (median 31.2%, IQR 8.5%-46.0%) compared to Fitbit (median 80.1%, IQR 26.7%-95.0%; P=.003) and Apple Watch (median 49.3%, IQR 21.5%-86.0%; P=.02). There was no significant difference between Fitbit and Apple Watch. Similar patterns were observed for step count and sleep data. The Samsung Galaxy Watch required more frequent troubleshooting for data flow issues and lacked additional physiological metrics, available from the other devices. Due to comparatively lower data quality and technical performance, the Samsung Galaxy Watch was discontinued for use in the subsequent phase of the CONNECT study. The study highlights the importance of incorporating nested evaluations of devices in long-term research.