ABSTRACTBackgroundThe Bayley Scales of Infant Development is used in many studies and clinical trials in children with developmental disabilities, including children with Angelman syndrome (AS).MethodWe assessed 142 children with AS in an international multicentre study with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development III, of which 52 children were tested more than once. We assessed criterion validity using proportion analysis, scalability using Mokken analyses and stability of scoring by counting pass‐to‐fail and fail‐to‐pass items.ResultsResults revealed good scalability in all scales but the expressive language scale, indicating that the items of these scales measured one underlying trait. In the expressive language scale, the AS‐related speech difficulties invalidated scoring. Scoring within children across assessments was unstable for all scales except the gross motor scale, as more than half of the children made one or more errors in previously correct items. Loss or regression of skills does not fully explain this finding. Alternative explanations including motivation, concentration, on‐task behaviour and anxiety should also be considered when scores decline.ConclusionsThis study shows that caution should be taken when interpreting single and successive scores of children with AS on the Bayley‐III and that other forms of assessment should complement assessment in children with AS.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prescription rates in the U.S. remain suboptimal despite its high efficacy in HIV prevention. Healthcare provider (HCP) awareness of PrEP guidelines is crucial, yet limited data exist on guideline-specific awareness versus general PrEP knowledge. This study examined PrEP guideline awareness, prescribing behaviors, and associated HCP characteristics using 2022-2024 DocStyles data to inform targeted interventions. Data were drawn from the 2022-2024 DocStyles surveys of U.S. HCPs (N = 4,507). Chi-square tests and generalized linear models assessed relationships between PrEP guideline awareness, prescribing behaviors, and HCP demographic and clinical characteristics. PrEP guideline awareness increased from 44% (2022) to 57% (2023), then declined to 50% (2024; p <.001). HCPs over age 44 and OB/GYNs were more likely to be aware of PrEP guidelines than younger HCPs and family practitioners. Guideline awareness did not differ by region, sex, race/ethnicity, or clinical setting. PrEP prescribing to all sexually active individuals increased from 23% (2022), 29% (2023) to 33% (2024; p <.001). Non-White HCPs were more likely to prescribe PrEP than White HCPs. Compared to HCPs in the South, those in the Northeast and West were more likely to prescribe PrEP, while Midwestern HCPs were less likely. OB/GYNs, NPs, and PAs were less likely to prescribe PrEP than family practitioners. Significant variations in PrEP guideline awareness and prescribing behaviors exist among U.S. HCPs. Targeted communication campaigns and tailored interventions are essential to address these differences, enhance guideline adherence, and optimize PrEP uptake to reduce HIV incidence nationally.

The Alive & Thrive multilevel, multicomponent intervention to engage fathers in complementary feeding in Kaduna State, Nigeria previously showed significant increases in complementary feeding practices for children. This analysis explores the perceptions of intervention deliverers and recipients to inform future spread. The intervention components included counseling cards, home visits, feeding bowls, texts/prerecorded messages, posters, leaflets, sermon guides, talking points, radio and television spots. In-depth interviews (24) were conducted with intervention deliverers (community health extension workers, community and religious leaders) and focus group discussions (16) with recipients (parents of children 6–23 months) from 6 rural and urban wards. Participants were purposively sampled; parents were not selected as couples. Eligibility for CHEWs and CRLs included being ≥ 18 years and having participated in intervention implementation. Eligibility for parents included being ≥18 years (or married mothers 15–17 years), having a biological child 6–23 months, and receiving the intervention. Transcripts were coded descriptively in Atlas.ti and the results were mapped to the domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2.0. For the innovation domain, intervention deliverers and recipients reported high acceptability and appropriateness of the intervention components. For the outer domain, the intervention was perceived to be influenced by values and beliefs (fathers’ roles as providers), systemic conditions (economic hardships), and critical incidents (COVID-19). The intervention was also influenced by relational connections, compatibility, intervention deliverers and recipients, teaming, tailoring strategies and engaging for the domains of inner setting, individuals, and implementation process, respectively. For implementation strategies, intervention deliverers liked the training and monthly meetings where they shared experiences and problem solved. The Alive & Thrive intervention in Kaduna State, Nigeria was acceptable, appropriate, and feasible for intervention deliverers and recipients.