Search

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) collected information from the enrolled pregnancy onwards to identify features of the environment in which the study child was brought up. Among data collected were features concerning the health of the mothers’ partners – generally the study father. This was an important feature since the father’s physical and mental health can have a long-term effect on the family. In this Data Note we describe the data available on the father’s health from pregnancy until 12 years after the offspring was born. Not only is this a valuable addition to the environmental information available for studies of the child’s development and the mental health of the mother over time, but it will provide a useful description of the father himself during adulthood.

Religious/spiritual belief and practices have sometimes been demonstrated to have positive associations with outcomes such as coping with serious illness, anxiety, depression, negative life events and general well-being, and therefore warrants consideration in many facets of health research. For example, increasing secularisation evidenced, particularly in the West, may reflect increasing rates of depression and anxiety. Very few studies have charted the ways in which religious/spiritual beliefs and practices of parents and their offspring vary longitudinally or between generations. Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is one such study that can relate belief and practices with aspects of physical and mental health and/or distinguish the different facets of the environment that may influence the development, or inter-generational loss, of belief and behaviours. This paper describes the 2019–2020 data collection in the ALSPAC on the religious/spiritual beliefs and behaviours (RSBB) of the study offspring (born 1991/1992) at ages 27–28 years. Previously collected and new data on the offspring are described here and comparisons are made with identical data completed by their parents (mothers and their partners) in early 2020. The most striking observations are that in almost all aspects of RSBB the offspring of both sexes are more secular, especially when compared with their mothers. For example, 56.2% of offspring state that they do not believe in God, or a divine power compared with 26.6% of mothers and 45.3% of mothers’ partners. When asked about their type of religion, 65.4% of participants stated ‘none’, compared with 27.2% of mothers and 40.2% of partners. This confirms previous research reporting increasing secularisation from one generation to the next. As with the mothers and their partners, female offspring were more likely than males to believe in a divine power and to practice their beliefs.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) collected information from the enrolled pregnancy onwards to identify features of the environment in which the study child was brought up. Among data collected were features concerning the health of the mothers’ partners – generally the study father. This was an important feature since the father’s physical and mental health can have a long-term effect on the family. In this Data Note we describe the data available on the father’s health from pregnancy until 12 years after the offspring was born. Not only is this a valuable addition to the environmental information available for studies of the child’s development and the mental health of the mother over time, but it will provide a useful description of the father himself during adulthood.

Abstract Background We developed a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool (‘CRISP’) to provide individualised risk-based advice for colorectal cancer screening. Using known environmental, behavioural, and familial risk factors, CRISP was designed to facilitate tailored screening advice to patients aged 50 to 74 years in general practice. In parallel to a randomised controlled trial of the CRISP tool, we developed and evaluated an evidence-based implementation strategy. Methods Qualitative methods were used to explore the implementation of CRISP in general practice. Using one general practice in regional Victoria, Australia, as a ‘laboratory’, we tested ways to embed CRISP into routine clinical practice. General practitioners, nurses, and operations manager co-designed the implementation methods with researchers, focussing on existing practice processes that would be sustainable. Researchers interviewed the staff regularly to assess the successfulness of the strategies employed, and implementation methods were adapted throughout the study period in response to feedback from qualitative interviews. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) underpinned the development of the interview guide and intervention strategy. Coding was inductive and themes were developed through consensus between the authors. Emerging themes were mapped onto the CFIR domains and a fidelity checklist was developed to ensure CRISP was being used as intended. Results Between December 2016 and September 2019, 1 interviews were conducted, both face-to-face and via videoconferencing (Zoom). All interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded. Themes were mapped onto the following CFIR domains: (1) ‘characteristics of the intervention’: CRISP was valued but time consuming; (2) ‘inner setting’: the practice was open to changing systems; 3. ‘outer setting’: CRISP helped facilitate screening; (4) ‘individual characteristics’: the practice staff were adaptable and able to facilitate adoption of new clinical processes; and (5) ‘processes’: fidelity checking, and education was important. Conclusions These results describe a novel method for exploring implementation strategies for a colorectal cancer risk prediction tool in the context of a parallel RCT testing clinical efficacy. The study identified successful and unsuccessful implementation strategies using an adaptive methodology over time. This method emphasised the importance of co-design input to make an intervention like CRISP sustainable for use in other practices and with other risk tools.

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) collected information from the enrolled pregnancy onwards to identify features of the environment in which the study child was brought up. Among data collected were features concerning the health of the mothers’ partners – generally the study father. This was an important feature since the father’s physical and mental health can have a long-term effect on the family. In this Data Note we describe the data available on the father’s health from pregnancy until 12 years after the offspring was born. Not only is this a valuable addition to the environmental information available for studies of the child’s development and the mental health of the mother over time, but it will provide a useful description of the father himself during adulthood.

There are few studies that chart the ways in which the religious beliefs and practices of parents and their offspring vary over time. Even fewer can relate this to aspects of their physical and mental health or distinguish the different facets of the environment that may have influenced the development or loss of religious/spiritual belief and behaviours over time. This paper describes the recent data collection in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) on the beliefs and behaviours of the study parents some 27-28 years after the first measures were collected. Questions that were previously administered to the mother and her partner on religion, spirituality, behaviours, and beliefs (RSBB) were repeated for the fourth time, together with enhanced data on RSBB. The new data are described and compared with previous responses. The most notable difference between the 9 year and the 2020 sweep was the increase of professed non-believers in both the mothers (17.5% vs 29.8%) and partners (31.9% vs. 45.3%). As expected, on each occasion study partners were less likely to acknowledge RSBB compared to the study mothers. In the latest sweep, respondents were less likely to be unsure if they believed and more likely to not believe. Responses to “Do you believe in God or a divine power?” in mothers ranged from 49.9% stating ‘yes’ antenatally to 43.5% doing so in 2020; 14.9% vs 29.8% for ‘no’ and 35.2% to 26.6% for ‘not sure’. For partners, the corresponding figures are: ‘yes’ 37.0% vs. 30.0%; ‘no’ 28.6% vs. 45.3% and ‘not sure’ 34.5% vs. 24.6%. We plan to undertake detailed analyses of the antecedents and consequences of RBSS. All data are available for use by interested researchers.

There are few studies that chart the ways in which the religious beliefs and practices of parents and their offspring vary over time. Even fewer can relate this to aspects of their physical and mental health or distinguish the different facets of the environment that may have influenced the development or loss of religious/spiritual belief and behaviours over time. This paper describes the recent data collection in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) on the beliefs and behaviours of the study parents some 27-28 years after the first measures were collected. Questions that were previously administered to the mother and her partner on religion, spirituality, behaviours, and beliefs (RSBB) were repeated for the fourth time, together with enhanced data on RSBB. The new data are described and compared with previous responses. The most notable difference between the 9 year and the 2020 sweep was the increase of professed non-believers in both the mothers (17.5% vs 29.8%) and partners (31.9% vs. 45.3%). As expected, on each occasion study partners were less likely to acknowledge RSBB compared to the study mothers. In the latest sweep, respondents were less likely to be unsure if they believed and more likely to not believe. Responses to “Do you believe in God or a divine power?” in mothers ranged from 49.9% stating ‘yes’ antenatally to 43.5% doing so in 2020; 14.9% vs 29.8% for ‘no’ and 35.2% to 26.6% for ‘not sure’. For partners, the corresponding figures are: ‘yes’ 37.0% vs. 30.0%; ‘no’ 28.6% vs. 45.3% and ‘not sure’ 34.5% vs. 24.6%. We plan to undertake detailed analyses of the antecedents and consequences of RBSS. All data are available for use by interested researchers.