Objective This pragmatic randomized control trial aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy of the Making Sense of Brain Tumour program delivered via videoconferencing (Tele-MAST) for improving mental health and quality of life (QoL) relative to standard care in individuals with primary brain tumor (PBT). Method Adults with PBT experiencing at least mild distress (Distress Thermometer ≥4) and caregivers were randomly allocated to the 10-session Tele-MAST program or standard care. Mental health and QoL were assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention (primary endpoint), and 6-weeks and 6-months follow-up. The primary outcome was clinician-rated depressive symptoms on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. Results 82 participants with PBT (34% benign, 20% lower-grade glioma, 46% high-grade glioma) and 36 caregivers were recruited (2018–2021). Controlling for baseline functioning, Tele-MAST participants with PBT had lower depressive symptoms at post-intervention (95% CI: 10.2–14.6, vs. 15.2–19.6, p = 0.002) and 6-weeks post-intervention (95% CI: 11.5–15.8 vs. 15.6–19.9, p = 0.010) than standard care, and were almost 4 times more likely to experience clinically reduced depression (OR, 3.89; 95% CI: 1.5–9.9). Tele-MAST participants with PBT also reported significantly better global QoL, emotional QoL and lower anxiety at post-intervention and 6-weeks post-intervention than standard care. There were no significant intervention effects for caregivers. At 6-months follow-up participants with PBT who received Tele-MAST reported significantly better mental health and QoL relative to pre-intervention. Conclusions Tele-MAST was found to be more effective for reducing depressive symptoms at post-intervention than standard care for people with PBT but not caregivers. Tailored and extended psychological support may be beneficial for people with PBT.

There is a need for better evidence on how to effectively support consumer partnerships in research (CPR). This paper aims to provide a practical checklist for market researchers to plan, implement, and report research where vulnerable consumers are the target population. A vulnerable consumer is someone who, due to their circumstances, may be disadvantaged or at risk in some marketplace situations. Here, it is proposed that research conducted about vulnerable consumers must include consumer co-researchers as partners in the research process. The involvement of consumers as co-researchers addresses this methodological gap to some extent by democratizing research design and empowering vulnerable consumers. The CPR Checklist is based on an integrative realistic review method, content validation via an expert panel, and includes consumer co-researcher involvement in the research process. Considering the complexities of vulnerable consumers and market research, the CPR Checklist provides a suite of 'how and why' questions to guide rigorous and ethical project conduct.