Newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is freely and universally available to babies born in Australia, with nearly 300 000 newborns screened each year. The NBS programme screens for approximately 30 conditions; however, there are hundreds of childhood conditions that could be treated if identified earlier and asymptomatically. Contemporary screening platforms have relied on mass spectrometry-based technologies, limiting surveillance to conditions with validated biomarkers detectable within the neonatal period. Advancements in metabolic techniques and genomics have expanded the range of conditions that could be detected. The NewbornsInSA research study will develop, validate and evaluate a novel multi-omic model of newborn screening, integrating metabolomic and genomic newborn screening as complementary methodologies.

Parents can opt in to additional NBS through NewbornsInSA during pregnancy or shortly after birth. One thousand prospectively recruited families will be offered genomic NBS by whole-genome sequencing, including analysis of a virtual gene panel of over 600 genes, and concurrent metabolomic screening. Clinically actionable pathogenic or likely pathogenic genetic variants will be reported to parents and whole genome sequencing data will be available on request for diagnostic reanalysis, if required later in life.

Acceptability of the NewbornsInSA programme will be evaluated through stakeholder engagement activities with healthcare professionals, members of the public and patient advocacy groups. Family experiences will be assessed using online surveys. The diagnostic yield, accuracy and the costs and consequences of the multi-omic NBS model will be assessed by comparison to standard-of-care NBS.

NewbornsInSA will investigate the acceptability, feasibility and cost-effectiveness of a multi-omic newborn screening model in a prospectively recruited South Australian population. We hypothesise that this approach will increase the number of conditions identified, reduce the time to diagnosis and facilitate earlier care with better outcomes for newborns with genetic conditions.

This research study has been ethically approved by the Women’s and Children’s Health Network Human Research Ethics Committee (2022/HRE00258 and 2023/HRE00236). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conferences.

While digital technologies can increase the availability and access to evidence-based interventions, little is known about how users engage with them and the mechanisms associated with effective outcomes. Process evaluations are an important component in understanding the aforementioned factors. The ‘SPARX-UK’ study is a randomised controlled pilot and feasibility trial evaluating personalised human-supported (from an ‘eCoach’) vs a self-directed computerised cognitive behavioural therapy intervention (cCBT), called SPARX (Smart, Positive, Active, Realistic, X-factor thoughts), aimed at adolescents with mild to moderate depression. We are comparing supported vs self-directed delivery of SPARX to establish which format should be used in a proposed definitive trial of SPARX. The control is a waitlist group. We will conduct a process evaluation alongside the trial to determine how the intervention is implemented and provide context for interpreting the feasibility trial outcomes. We will also look at the acceptability of SPARX and how users engage with the intervention. This protocol paper describes the rationale, aims and methodology of the SPARX-UK trial process evaluation.

The process evaluation will use a mixed-methods design following the UK Medical Research Council’s 2015 guidelines, comprising quantitative and qualitative data collection. This will include analysing data usage of participants in the intervention arms; purposively sampled, semi-structured interviews of adolescents, parents/guardians, eCoaches and clinicians/practitioners from the SPARX-UK trial; and analysis of qualitative comments from a survey from those who dropped out early from the trial. Quantitative data will be analysed descriptively. We will use thematic analysis in a framework approach to analyse qualitative data. Quantitative and qualitative data will be mixed and integrated to provide an understanding of how the intervention was implemented and how adolescents interacted with the intervention. This process evaluation will explore the experiences of adolescent participants, parents/guardians, eCoaches and clinicians/practitioners in relation to a complex digital intervention.

Ethical approval was granted by the National Health Service (NHS) Health Research Authority South West - Cornwall & Plymouth Research Ethics Committee (Ethics Ref: 22/SW/0149).

Contextualising how the intervention was implemented, and the variations in uptake and engagement, will help us to understand the trial findings in greater depth. The findings from this process evaluation will also inform the decision about whether and how to proceed with a full randomised controlled trial, as well as the development of more effective interventions which can be personalised more precisely via varying levels of human support. We plan to publish the findings of the process evaluation and the wider project in peer-reviewed journals, as well as disseminate via academic conferences.

ISRCTN: ISRCTN15124804. Registered on 16 January 2023, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15124804.