Background: Mass media campaigns can be used to communicate public health messages at the population level. Although previous research has shown that they can influence health behaviours in some contexts, there have been few attempts to synthesise evidence across multiple health behaviours.Objectives: To (1) review evidence on the effective use of mass media in six health topic areas (alcohol, diet, illicit drugs, physical activity, sexual and reproductive health and tobacco), (2) examine whether or not effectiveness varies with different target populations, (3) identify characteristics of mass media campaigns associated with effectiveness and (4) identify key research gaps.Design: The study comprised (1) a systematic review of reviews, (2) a review of primary studies examining alcohol mass media campaigns, (3) a review of cost-effectiveness evidence and (4) a review of recent primary studies of mass media campaigns conducted in the UK. A logic model was developed to inform the reviews. Public engagement activities were conducted with policy, practitioner and academic stakeholders and with young people.Results: The amount and strength of evidence varies across the six topics, and there was little evidence regarding diet campaigns. There was moderate evidence that mass media campaigns can reduce sedentary behaviour and influence sexual health-related behaviours and treatment-seeking behaviours (e.g. use of smoking quitlines and sexual health services). The impact on tobacco use and physical activity was mixed, there was limited evidence of impact on alcohol use and there was no impact on illicit drug behaviours. Mass media campaigns were found to increase knowledge and awareness across several topics, and to influence intentions regarding physical activity and smoking. Tobacco and illicit drug campaigns appeared to be more effective for young people and children but there was no or inconsistent evidence regarding effectiveness by sex, ethnicity or socioeconomic status. There was moderate evidence that tobacco mass media campaigns are cost-effective, but there was weak or limited evidence in other topic areas. Although there was limited evidence on characteristics associated with effectiveness, longer or greater intensity campaigns were found to be more effective, and messages were important, with positive and negative messages and social norms messages affecting smoking behaviour. The evidence suggested that targeting messages to target audiences can be effective. There was little evidence regarding the role that theory or media channels may play in campaign effectiveness, and also limited evidence on new media.Limitations: Statistical synthesis was not possible owing to considerable heterogeneity across reviews and studies. The focus on review-level evidence limited our ability to examine intervention characteristics in detail.Conclusions: Overall, the evidence is mixed but suggests that (1) campaigns can reduce sedentary behaviour, improve sexual health and contribute to smoking cessation, (2) tobacco control campaigns can be cost-effective, (3) longer and more intensive campaigns are likely to be more effective and (4) message design and targeting campaigns to particular population groups can be effective.Future work: Future work could fill evidence gaps regarding diet mass media campaigns and new-media campaigns, examine cost-effectiveness in areas other than tobacco and explore the specific contribution of mass media campaigns to multicomponent interventions and how local, regional and national campaigns can work together.Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015029205 and PROSPERO CRD42017054999.Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.

Reducing smoking in pregnancy is a policy priority in many countries and as a result there has been a rise in the development of services to help pregnant women to quit. A wide range of professionals are involved in providing these services, with midwives playing a particularly pivotal role. Understanding professionals’ experiences of providing smoking cessation support in pregnancy can help to inform the design of interventions as well as to improve routine care. A synthesis of qualitative research of health professionals’ perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to providing smoking cessation advice to women in pregnancy and the post-partum period was conducted using meta-ethnography. Searches were undertaken from 1990 to January 2015 using terms for maternity health professionals and smoking cessation advisors, pregnancy, post-partum, smoking, and qualitative in seven electronic databases. The review was reported in accordance with the ‘Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research’ (ENTREQ) statement. Eight studies reported in nine papers were included, reporting on the views of 190 health professionals/key informants, including 85 midwives and health visitors. The synthesis identified that both the professional role of participants and the organisational context in which they worked could act as either barriers or facilitators to an individual’s ability to provide smoking cessation support to pregnant or post-partum women. Underpinning these factors was an acknowledgment that the association between maternal smoking and social disadvantage was a considerable barrier to addressing and supporting smoking cessation The review identifies a role for professional education, both pre-qualification and in continuing professional development that will enable individuals to provide smoking cessation support to pregnant women. Key to the success of this education is recognising the centrality of the professional-client/patient relationship in any interaction. The review also highlights a widespread professional perception of the barriers associated with helping women give up smoking in pregnancy, particularly for those in disadvantaged circumstances. Improving the quality and accessibility of evidence on effective healthcare interventions, including evidence on ‘what works’ to support smoking cessation in disadvantaged groups, should therefore be a priority. CRD42013004170 .

Background: There is a higher incidence of cardiac arrest in economically deprived areas; however, data show that bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in those areas is lower. This results in lower survival rates, placing those communities at a double disadvantage. This systematic review explored the barriers and facilitators to engaging with bystander CPR in deprived communities. Methods: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they addressed any barrier or facilitator to performing bystander CPR or being trained in CPR or training others. Studies had to either be set in a deprived area or examine a deprived population. Selected studies were published between January 2000 and December 2017 and reported on primary research. No language limitations were applied. Searches were conducted in the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science Core Collection. Unpublished ‘grey’ literature was also searched as well as the reference lists of any relevant studies. Results: The systematic review highlighted several main factors acting as barriers or facilitators to engaging with bystander CPR in deprived communities: (1) the willingness to learn or perform CPR, (2) the confidence to perform CPR, and (3) self-reported likelihood of performing CPR. The review also revealed additional barriers to engaging with CPR which are specific to – or more acute for – individuals from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds or areas. Discussion: We found little evidence suggesting that the willingness to perform or learn bystander CPR is lower in deprived communities compared to the general population. However, the confidence to perform CPR in deprived communities was affected by some measures of socioeconomic status. The results also crucially highlighted other barriers more acute in deprived communities: the risk to personal safety in administering CPR; the fear of legal consequences; and the lack of community cohesion and other cultural barriers.

Objectives To examine public views on COVID-19 vaccination and consider the implications for communications and targeted support. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Online and telephone nationally representative survey in Great Britain, January to February 2021. Participants 4978 adults. Survey response rate was 84%, among the 5931 panellists invited. Main outcome measures Sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity, education, financial status), COVID-19 status, vaccine acceptance, trust in COVID-19 vaccination information sources, perceptions of vaccination priority groups and perceptions of importance of second dose. Results COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (83%) was associated with increasing age, higher level of education and having been invited for vaccination. Acceptance decreased with unconfirmed past COVID-19, greater financial hardship and non-white British ethnicity; black/black British participants had lowest acceptance. Overall, healthcare and scientific sources of information were most trusted. Compared with white British participants, other ethnicities had lower trust in healthcare and scientific sources. Those with lower educational attainment or financial hardship had lower trust in healthcare and scientific sources. Those with no qualifications had higher trust in media and family/friends. While trust was low overall in community or faith leaders, it was higher among those with Asian/Asian British and black/black British ethnicity compared with white British participants. Views of vaccine prioritisation were mostly consistent with UK official policy but there was support for prioritising additional groups. There was high support for having the second vaccine dose. Conclusions Targeted engagement is needed to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in non-white British ethnic groups, in younger adults, and among those with lower education, greater financial hardship and unconfirmed past infection. Healthcare professionals and scientific advisors should play a central role in communications and tailored messaging is needed for hesitant groups. Careful communication around vaccination prioritisation continues to be required.

Smoking in pregnancy can cause substantial harm and, while many women quit, others continue to smoke throughout pregnancy. The role of partners is an important but relatively under-researched factor in relation to women’s smoking in pregnancy; partner’s smoking status and attitudes to smoking cessation are important influences in a pregnant women’s attempt to quit. Further understanding of how partners perceive the barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation in pregnancy is needed, particularly from qualitative studies where participants describe these issues in their own words. A synthesis of qualitative research of partners’ views of smoking in pregnancy and post-partum was conducted using meta-ethnography. Searches were undertaken from 1990 to January 2014 using terms for partner/household, pregnancy, post-partum, smoking, qualitative in seven electronic databases. The review was reported in accordance with the ‘Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research’ (ENTREQ) statement. Nine studies reported in 14 papers were included, detailing the experience of 158 partners; the majority were interviewed during the post-partum period. Partners were all male, with a single exception. Socioeconomic measures indicated that most participants were socially disadvantaged. The synthesis identified recurring smoking-related perceptions and experiences that hindered (barriers) and encouraged (facilitators) partners to consider quitting during the woman’s pregnancy and into the post-partum period. These were represented in five lines of argument relating to: smoking being an integral part of everyday life; becoming and being a father; the couple’s relationship; perceptions of the risks of smoking; and their harm reduction and quitting strategies. The cluster of identified barriers and facilitators to quitting offers pointers for policy and practice. The workplace emerges as an important space for and influence on partners’ smoking habits, suggesting alternative cessation intervention locations for future parents. Conversely, health and community settings are seen to offer little support to fathers. Interventions centred on valued personal traits, like will-power and autonomy, may have particular salience. The review points, too, to the potential for health information that directly addresses perceived weaknesses in official advice, for example, around causal mechanisms and effects and around contrary evidence of healthy babies born to smokers. PROSPERO 2013: CRD42013004170

Introduction: Exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) in pregnancy leads to an increased risk of stillbirths, congenital malformations, and low birth weight. There is a lack of evidence about how best to achieve reductions in SHS exposure among nonsmoking pregnant women. This work systematically reviews individual or household interventions to reduce pregnant women’s exposure to SHS. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases were searched from their dates of inception to April 17, 2019. Studies were included if: participants were nonsmoking pregnant women; involved an intervention to reduce SHS exposure or encourage partner quitting; and measured SHS exposure of pregnant women and/or recorded quit rates among partners. The UK National Institute for Health & Care Excellence (NICE) Quality Appraisal checklist was used to determine internal and external validity. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Educational interventions were primarily targeted at the pregnant woman to change her or others’ behavior, with only two studies involving the partner who smoked. Intervention delivery was mixed, spanning brief discussions through to more involving sessions with role play. The effective interventions involved multiple follow-ups. There was no standardized method of assessing exposure to SHS. Many of the included studies had moderate to high risk of bias. Conclusion: There is mixed evidence for interventions aimed at reducing pregnant women’s exposure to SHS, though multi-component interventions seem to be more effective. The effectiveness of family-centered approaches involving creating smoke-free homes alongside partner smoking cessation, perhaps involving pharmacological support and/or financial incentives, should be explored. Implications: • Measures to protect nonsmoking pregnant women from SHS tend to place the responsibility for “avoidance” on the woman. • There is little work that seeks to involve the smoking partner or other smokers in protecting pregnant women from SHS. • Interventions to create smoke-free homes and/or smoking partner cessation need to be developed: pharmacological and financial support should be explored.