Emily Eyles

Dr. Emily Eyles

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
4 September 2020 in F1000Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AJAnn John
Ann John
COChukwudi Okolie
Chukwudi Okolie
EEEmily Eyles
Emily Eyles
RWRoger T. Webb
Roger T. Webb
LSLena Schmidt
Lena Schmidt
DGDavid Gunnell
David Gunnell
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused morbidity and mortality, as well as, widespread disruption to people’s lives and livelihoods around the world. Given the health and economic threats posed by the pandemic to the global community, there are concerns that rates of suicide and suicidal behaviour may rise during and in its aftermath. Our living systematic review (LSR) focuses on suicide prevention in relation to COVID-19, with this iteration synthesising relevant evidence up to June 7 th 2020. Method: Automated daily searches feed into a web-based database with screening and data extraction functionalities. Eligibility criteria include incidence/prevalence of suicidal behaviour, exposure-outcome relationships and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes of interest are suicide, self-harm or attempted suicide and suicidal thoughts. No restrictions are placed on language or study type, except for single-person case reports. Results: Searches identified 2070 articles, 29 (28 studies) met our inclusion criteria, of which 14 articles were research letters or pre-prints awaiting peer review. All articles reported observational data: 12 cross-sectional; eight case series; five modelling; and three service utilisation studies. No studies reported on changes in rates of suicidal behaviour. Case series were largely drawn from news reporting in low/middle income countries and factors associated with suicide included fear of infection, social isolation and economic concerns. Conclusions: A marked improvement in the quality of design, methods, and reporting in future studies is needed. There is thus far no clear evidence of an increase in suicide, self-harm, suicidal behaviour, or suicidal thoughts associated with the pandemic. However, suicide data are challenging to collect in real time and economic effects are evolving. Our LSR will provide a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020183326 01/05/2020

17 June 2021 in F1000Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AJAnn John
Ann John
EEEmily Eyles
Emily Eyles
RWRoger T. Webb
Roger T. Webb
COChukwudi Okolie
Chukwudi Okolie
LSLena Schmidt
Lena Schmidt
DGDavid Gunnell
David Gunnell
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused considerable morbidity, mortality and disruption to people’s lives around the world. There are concerns that rates of suicide and suicidal behaviour may rise during and in its aftermath. Our living systematic review synthesises findings from emerging literature on incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour as well as suicide prevention efforts in relation to COVID-19, with this iteration synthesising relevant evidence up to 19 th October 2020. Method: Automated daily searches feed into a web-based database with screening and data extraction functionalities. Eligibility criteria include incidence/prevalence of suicidal behaviour, exposure-outcome relationships and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes of interest are suicide, self-harm or attempted suicide and suicidal thoughts. No restrictions are placed on language or study type, except for single-person case reports. We exclude one-off cross-sectional studies without either pre-pandemic measures or comparisons of COVID-19 positive vs. unaffected individuals. Results: Searches identified 6,226 articles. Seventy-eight articles met our inclusion criteria. We identified a further 64 relevant cross-sectional studies that did not meet our revised inclusion criteria. Thirty-four articles were not peer-reviewed (e.g. research letters, pre-prints). All articles were based on observational studies. There was no consistent evidence of a rise in suicide but many studies noted adverse economic effects were evolving. There was evidence of a rise in community distress, fall in hospital presentation for suicidal behaviour and early evidence of an increased frequency of suicidal thoughts in those who had become infected with COVID-19. Conclusions: Research evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal behaviour is accumulating rapidly. This living review provides a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide risk as the longer term impacts of the pandemic on suicide risk are researched.

22 May 2017 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JMJosie Messina
Josie Messina
SCStephen Campbell
Stephen Campbell
RMRebecca Morris
Rebecca Morris
EEEmily Eyles
Emily Eyles
CSCaroline Sanders
Caroline Sanders
Type 2 diabetes is impacting millions of people globally; however, many future cases can be prevented through lifestyle changes and interventions. Primary care is an important setting for diabetes prevention, for at-risk populations, because it is a patient’s primary point of contact with the health care system and professionals can provide lifestyle counselling and support, as well as monitoring health outcomes. These are all essential elements for diabetes prevention for at-risk adults. To understand the factors related to the delivery and uptake of type 2 diabetes prevention interventions within primary care in higher income countries. For this narrative systematic review, we combined qualitative and quantitative studies of diabetes prevention within a primary care setting for patients at-risk of developing the condition. We used an iterative approach for evidence collection, which included using several databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Pysch info, BNI, SSCI, CINAHL, ASSIA), where we combined diabetes terms with primary care terms. Narrative and thematic synthesis were utilised to identify the prominent themes emerging from the data. A database of 6646 records was screened by the research team, and 18 papers were included. Three major themes were identified in this review. The first theme of context and setting of diabetes progression includes the risk and progression of diabetes, primary care as a setting, and where the responsibility for change is thought to lie. This review also found mixed views on the value of preventative services within primary care. The second theme focused on the various patient factors associated with diabetes prevention such as a patient’s motivation to modify their current lifestyle, perceptions and knowledge (or lack thereof) of the impacts of diabetes, lack of follow-up in healthcare settings, and trust in healthcare professionals. The third theme was centred on professional factors impacting on diabetes prevention which included workload, time constraints, resources, self-efficacy and knowledge as well as professionals’ perception of patient motivations towards change. This review explored the factors influencing diabetes prevention in primary care, and identified the context of prevention, as well as patient and professional factors related to preventative services being offered in primary care. This systematic review complements previous reviews of real-world settings by exploring the significant factors in prevention, and the findings are relevant to academics, policymakers, patients and practitioners interested in understanding the factors associated with the delivery and uptake of diabetes prevention interventions.

1 April 2019 in Social Science & Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EEEmily Eyles
Emily Eyles
DMDavid Manley
David Manley
KJKelvyn Jones
Kelvyn Jones
Health inequalities continue to grow despite continuous policy intervention. Work, one domain of health inequalities, is often included as a component of social class rather than as a determinant in its own right. Many social class classifications are derived from occupation types, but there are other components within them that mean they may not be useful as proxies for occupation. This paper develops the exposome, a life-course exposure model developed by Wild (2005), into the worksome, allowing for the explicit consideration of both physical and psychosocial exposures and effects derived from work and working conditions. The interactions between and within temporal and geographical scales are strongly emphasised, and the interwoven nature of both psychosocial and physical exposures is highlighted. Individuals within an occupational type can be both affected by and effect upon occupation level characteristics and health measures. By using the worksome, occupation types are separated from value-laden social classifications. This paper will empirically examine whether occupation better predicts health measures from the European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS). Logistic regression models using Bayesian MCMC estimation were run for each classification system, for each health measure. Health measures included, for example, whether the respondent felt their work affected their health, their self-rated health, pain in upper or lower limbs, and headaches. Using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), a measure of predictive accuracy penalised for model complexity, the models were assessed against one another. The DIC shows empirically which classification system is most suitable for use in modelling. The 2-digit International Standard Classification of Occupations showed the best predictive accuracy for all measures. Therefore, examining the relationship between health and work should be done with classifications specific to occupation or industry rather than socio-economic class classifications. This justifies the worksome, allowing for a conceptual framework to link many forms of work-health research.

1 December 2021 in Journal of Affective Disorders Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EEEmily Eyles
Emily Eyles
PMPaul Moran
Paul Moran
COChukwudi Okolie
Chukwudi Okolie
DDDana Dekel
Dana Dekel
CMCatherine Macleod-Hall
Catherine Macleod-Hall
DGDavid Gunnell
David Gunnell
The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the mental health of healthcare and social care workers, and its potential effect on suicidal thoughts and behaviour is of particular concern. This systematic review identified and appraised the published literature that has reported on the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal thoughts and behaviour and self-harm amongst healthcare and social care workers worldwide up to May 31, 2021. Out of 37 potentially relevant papers identified, ten met our eligibility criteria. Our review has highlighted that the impact of COVID-19 has varied as a function of setting, working relationships, occupational roles, and psychiatric comorbidities. There have been no completed cohort studies comparing pre- and post-pandemic suicidal thoughts and behaviours. It is possible some papers may have been missed in the search. The current quality of evidence pertaining to suicidal behaviour in healthcare workers is poor, and evidence is entirely absent for those working in social care. The clinical relevance of this work is to bring attention to what evidence exists, and to encourage, in practice, proactive approaches to interventions for improving healthcare and social care worker mental health.

25 June 2020 in F1000Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AJAnn John
Ann John
EEEmily Eyles
Emily Eyles
LMLuke A. McGuinness
Luke A. McGuinness
COChukwudi Okolie
Chukwudi Okolie
BOBabatunde K. Olorisade
Babatunde K. Olorisade
JHJulian P.T. Higgins
Julian P.T. Higgins
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused widespread morbidity and mortality as well as disruption to people’s lives and livelihoods around the world; this has occurred as a result of both infection with the virus itself and the health protection measures taken to curb its spread. There are concerns that rates of suicide, suicidal behaviours and self-harm may rise during and in the aftermath of the pandemic. Given the likely rapidly expanding research evidence base on the pandemic’s impact on rates of suicide, suicidal behaviours and self-harm and emerging evidence about how best to mitigate such effects, it is important that the best available knowledge is made readily available to policymakers, public health specialists and clinicians as soon as is possible. To facilitate this, we plan to undertake a living systematic review focusing on suicide prevention in relation to COVID-19. Method: Regular automated searches will feed into a web-based screening system which will also host the data extraction form for included articles. Our eligibility criteria are wide and include aspects of incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour, effects of exposures and effects of interventions in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, with minimal restrictions on the types of study design to be included. The outcomes assessed will be death by suicide; self-harm or attempted suicide (including hospital attendance and/or admission for these reasons); and suicidal thoughts/ideation. There will be no restriction on study type, except for single case reports. There will be no restriction on language of publication. The review will be updated at three-monthly intervals if a sufficient volume of new evidence justifies doing so. Conclusions: Our living review will provide a regular synthesis of the most up-to-date research evidence to guide public health and clinical policy to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on suicide. Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42020183326 01/05/2020