Lee Valentine

Bio: Lee Valentine is an academic researcher from University of Melbourne. The author has contributed to research in topics: Mental health & Psychological intervention. The author has an hindex of 7, co-authored 16 publications receiving 125 citations.

Implementation lessons from the transition to telehealth during COVID-19: a survey of clinicians and young people from youth mental health services.

Abstract: Whilst telehealth may overcome some traditional barriers to care, successful implementation into service settings is scarce, particularly within youth mental health care. This study aimed to leverage the rapid implementation of telehealth due to COVID-19 to understand the perspectives of young people and clinicians on how telehealth impacts service delivery, service quality, and to develop pathways for future uses. Youth mental health service users (aged 12-25) and clinicians took part in an online survey exploring service provision, use, and quality following the adoption of telehealth. Service use data from the period were also examined. Ninety-two clinicians and 308 young people responded to the survey. Service use was reduced compared to the same period in 2019, however, attendance rates were higher. Across eight domains of service quality, the majority of young people reported that telehealth positively impacted service quality, and were significantly more likely to rate telehealth as having a positive impact on service quality than clinicians. There was high interest in continuing to use telehealth as part of care beyond the pandemic, supporting its permanent role in youth mental health care for a segment of service users. Future work should explore how best to support its long-term implementation.

HORYZONS trial: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a moderated online social therapy to maintain treatment effects from first-episode psychosis services.

Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Specialised early intervention services have demonstrated improved outcomes in first-episode psychosis (FEP); however, clinical gains may not be sustained after patients are transferred to regular care. Moreover, many patients with FEP remain socially isolated with poor functional outcomes. To address this, our multidisciplinary team has developed a moderated online social media therapy (HORYZONS) designed to enhance social functioning and maintain clinical gains from specialist FEP services. HORYZONS merges: (1) peer-to-peer social networking; (2) tailored therapeutic interventions; (3) expert and peer-moderation; and (4) new models of psychological therapy (strengths and mindfulness-based interventions) targeting social functioning. The aim of this trial is to determine whether following 2 years of specialised support and 18-month online social media-based intervention (HORYZONS) is superior to 18 months of regular care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a single-blind randomised controlled trial. The treatment conditions include HORYZONS plus treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU alone. We recruited 170 young people with FEP, aged 16-27 years, in clinical remission and nearing discharge from Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre, Melbourne. The study includes four assessment time points, namely, baseline, 6-month, 12-month and 18-month follow-up. The study is due for completion in July 2018 and included a 40-month recruitment period and an 18-month treatment phase. The primary outcome is social functioning at 18 months. Secondary outcome measures include rate of hospital admissions, cost-effectiveness, vocational status, depression, social support, loneliness, self-esteem, self-efficacy, anxiety, psychological well-being, satisfaction with life, quality of life, positive and negative psychotic symptoms and substance use. Social functioning will be also assessed in real time through our Smartphone Ecological Momentary Assessment tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Melbourne Health Human Research Ethics Committee (2013.146) provided ethics approval for this study. Findings will be made available through scientific journals and forums and to the public via social media and the Orygen website. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12614000009617; Pre-results.

A Novel Multimodal Digital Service (Moderated Online Social Therapy+) for Help-Seeking Young People Experiencing Mental Ill-Health: Pilot Evaluation Within a National Youth E-Mental Health Service.

Abstract: Background: Mental ill-health is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Moreover, 75% of mental health conditions emerge between the ages of 12 and 25 years. Unfortunately, due to lack of resources and limited engagement with services, a majority of young people affected by mental ill-health do not access evidence-based support. To address this gap, our team has developed a multimodal, scalable digital mental health service (Enhanced Moderated Online Social Therapy [MOST+]) merging real-time, clinician-delivered web chat counseling; interactive user-directed online therapy; expert and peer moderation; and peer-to-peer social networking. Objective: The primary aim of this study is to ascertain the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of MOST+. The secondary aims are to assess pre-post changes in clinical, psychosocial, and well-being outcomes and to explore the correlations between system use, perceived helpfulness, and secondary outcome variables. Methods: Overall, 157 young people seeking help from a national youth e-mental health service were recruited over 5 weeks. MOST+ was active for 9 weeks. All participants had access to interactive online therapy and integrated web chat counseling. Additional access to peer-to-peer social networking was granted to 73 participants (46.5%) for whom it was deemed safe. The intervention was evaluated via an uncontrolled single-group study. Results: Overall, 93 participants completed the follow-up assessment. Most participants had moderate (52/157, 33%) to severe (96/157, 61%) mental health conditions. All a priori feasibility, acceptability, and safety criteria were met. Participants provided mean scores of ≥3.5 (out of 5) on ease of use (mean 3.7, SD 1.1), relevancy (mean 3.9, SD 1.0), helpfulness (mean 3.5, SD 0.9), and overall experience (mean 3.9, SD 0.8). Moreover, 98% (91/93) of participants reported a positive experience using MOST+, 82% (70/93) reported that using MOST+ helped them feel better, 86% (76/93) felt more socially connected using it, and 92% (86/93) said they would recommend it to others. No serious adverse events or inappropriate use were detected, and 97% (90/93) of participants reported feeling safe. There were statistically significant improvements in 8 of the 11 secondary outcomes assessed: psychological distress (d=−0.39; P<.001), perceived stress (d=−0.44; P<.001), psychological well-being (d=0.51; P<.001), depression (d=−0.29; P<.001), loneliness (d=−0.23; P=.04), social support (d=0.30; P<.001), autonomy (d=0.36; P=.001), and self-competence (d=0.30; P<.001). There were significant correlations between system use, perceived helpfulness, and a number of secondary outcome variables. Conclusions: MOST+ is a feasible, acceptable, and safe online clinical service for young people with mental ill-health. The high level of perceived helpfulness, the significant improvements in secondary outcomes, and the correlations between indicators of system use and secondary outcome variables provide initial support for the therapeutic potential of MOST+. MOST+ is a promising and scalable platform to deliver standalone e-mental health services as well as enhance the growing international network of face-to-face youth mental health services.

The Answer Is 17 Years, What Is the Question

Abstract: This study aimed to review the literature describing and quantifying time lags in the health research translation process. Papers were included in the review if they quantified time lags in the development of health interventions. The study identified 23 papers. Few were comparable as different studies use different measures, of different things, at different time points. We concluded that the current state of knowledge of time lags is of limited use to those responsible for R&D and knowledge transfer who face difficulties in knowing what they should or can do to reduce time lags. This effectively ‘blindfolds’ investment decisions and risks wasting effort. The study concludes that understanding lags first requires agreeing models, definitions and measures, which can be applied in practice. A second task would be to develop a process by which to gather these data.

The american journal of psychiatry

Abstract: Articles 1278 An Inflammatory Biomarker as a Differential Predictor of Outcome of Depression Treatment With Escitalopram and Nortriptyline Rudolf Uher et. al 1287 Identification and Replication of a Combined Epigenetic and Genetic Biomarker Predicting Suicide and Suicidal Behaviors Jerry Guintivano et. al 1297 Clinical Outcomes and Genome-Wide Association for a Brain Methylation Site in an Antidepressant Pharmacogenetics Study in Mexican Americans Ma-Li Wong et. al

Measuring total and domain-specific sitting: A study of reliability and validity

Abstract: MARSHALL, A. L., Y. D. MILLER, N. W. BURTON, and W. J. BROWN. Measuring Total and Domain-Specific Sitting: A Study of Reliability and Validity. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 42, No. 6, pp. 1094-1102, 2010. Purpose: Although independent relationships between sitting behaviors (mainly television viewing) and health outcomes have been reported, few studies have examined the measurement properties of self-report sitting questions. This study assessed gender-specific test-retest reliability and validity of a questionnaire that assessed time spent sitting on weekdays and weekend days: 1) traveling to and from places, 2) at work, 3) watching television, 4) using a computer at home, and 5) for leisure, not including television. Methods: Test-retest reliability of domain-specific sitting time (min.d(-1)) on weekdays and weekend days was assessed using data collected on two occasions (median = 11 d apart). Validity of domain-specific self-reported sitting time on weekdays and weekend days was assessed against log data and sedentary accelerometer data. Results: Complete repeat questionnaire and log data were obtained from 157 women (aged 51-59 yr) and 96 men (aged 45-63 yr). Reliability coefficients were high for weekday sitting time at work, watching television, and using a computer at home (r = 0.84-0.78) but lower for weekend days across all domains (r = 0.23-0.74). Validity coefficients were highest for weekday sitting time at work and using a computer at home (r = 0.69-0.74). With the exception of computer use and watching television for women, validity of the weekend-day sitting time items was low. Conclusions: This study confirms the importance of measuring domain-and day-specific sitting time. The measurement properties of questions that assess structured domain-specific and weekday sitting time were acceptable and may be used in future studies that aim to elucidate associations between domain-specific sitting and health outcomes.