To explore the experiences of different stakeholders on the balance of package training and deployment of highly skilled Human Resources for Health for specialised services in Tanzania.

An exploratory qualitative case study was used as part of a larger tracer study conducted by Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) for its postgraduate programmes being a requirement for quality assurance. Semi-structured interview guides were used for in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs). Qualitative content analysis was adopted to analyse the data.

The trace study was carried out in all seven geopolitical zones of the Tanzania mainland and Unguja in Zanzibar.

We conducted 14 FGDs and 301 IDIs. Participants included alumni, immediate supervisors at employment sites, MUHAS faculty, continuing students at MUHAS and management of professional councils in Tanzania.

Key findings revealed variations in demands and recognition within the scheme of services, even after registration by professional councils. Five main themes emerged from the qualitative interviews: Package training to improve service provision, Unprofessional collegial relationships or issues related to professionalism within interdisciplinary teams, Silence of scheme services on super specialisation in the medical cadre, Silence of scheme services on specialisation in the nursing cadre, Integrated scheme of services for specialties in pharmacy.

The findings highlight the demand for specialised training, challenges with professionalism and inconsistencies in the recognition and remuneration of specialists across medical, nursing and pharmacy cadres within existing service schemes. There is a need for harmonisation between specialisation/super specialisation and the scheme of services. This harmonisation is crucial to ensure the provision of quality healthcare services. Furthermore, harmonisation requires multistakeholder engagement to realise universal health coverage strategies.

To explore the challenges experienced by people with intellectual disability, their carers and health and social care professionals when using and managing medication.

A synthesis of qualitative research using meta-ethnography.

We searched seven databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Science, Social Science and Conference Proceedings Citation Indices (Web of Science), Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and Proquest Dissertations and Theses from inception to September 2022 (updated in July 2023).

We included studies exploring the challenges and perceptions of people with intellectual disability, their carers and health and social care professionals regarding medication management and use.

We reviewed 7593 abstracts and 475 full texts, resulting in 45 included papers. Four major themes were identified: (1) Medication-related issues, (2) navigating autonomy and relationships, (3) knowledge and training needs and (4) inequalities in the healthcare system. We formulated a conceptual framework centred around people with intellectual disability and described the interconnectedness between them, their carers and health and social care professionals in the process of managing and using medication. We identified challenges that could be associated with the person, the medication and/or the context, along with a lack of understanding of these challenges and a lack of capability or resources to tackle them. We developed an overarching concept of ‘collective collaboration’ as a potential solution to prevent or mitigate problems related to medication use in people with intellectual disability.

The effective management of medication for people with intellectual disability requires a collaborative and holistic approach. By fostering person-centred care and shared decision-making, providing educational and practical support, and nurturing strong relationships between all partners involved to form a collective collaboration surrounding people with intellectual disability, improved medication adherence and optimised therapeutic outcomes can be achieved.

CRD42022362903.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing, heterogeneous skin disease affecting 2%–7% of adults, with roughly 30% having moderate-to-severe disease. AD symptoms, like intense itching and skin pain, carry a substantial disease burden that negatively impacts patients’ quality of life (QoL) and psychosocial well-being. Lebrikizumab is a novel, high-affinity monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to and neutralises interleukin-13 with high potency. Three clinical trials with lebrikizumab (ADvocate 1 and 2; ADhere) demonstrated significant clinical benefit in patients with AD, while the 3-year long-term extension study of lebrikizumab (ADjoin) further demonstrated long-term efficacy and safety in patients with AD. The ADTrust study will evaluate patient well-being, their relationship with their skin, long-term effectiveness, and safety of lebrikizumab, treatment satisfaction, and long-term effect of lebrikizumab treatment on different aspects of patients’ lives, including itch, pain, sleep, fatigue, work impairment and overall QoL among adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD in a real-world setting.

This non-interventional, prospective, observational, real-world evidence study will involve approximately 150 sites across Europe and approximately 1200 adults with moderate-to-severe AD treated with lebrikizumab for 2 years. The primary endpoint is patient well-being assessed by the 5-item WHO Well-Being Index (WHO-5) questionnaire. Key secondary endpoints include clinical effectiveness (Eczema Area and Severity Index and Investigator’s Global Assessment Scale), disease symptomatology and control (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, 24-hour peak pruritus, skin pain, fatigue and sleep quality Numerical Rating Scale, and safety and tolerability. Other validated endpoints will evaluate physician-reported and patient-reported QoL and treatment satisfaction (Dermatology Life Quality Index, Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-9), patients’ work productivity and impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI)-AD) and disease control (AD Control Tool). Novel experimental endpoints will also be evaluated with the aim to assess patients’ relationship with their skin (SkinLove questionnaire), disease control (intensity and frequency of flares) and an Effectiveness Diary^+© (a brief monthly survey on a voluntary basis with the aim to assess the long-term impact of lebrikizumab on three fundamental aspects of the patients’ life: the well-being (WHO-5), the itch intensity (24 hours peak pruritus) and the frequency and intensity of flares). Statistical analyses will be descriptive and explorative and based on observed cases. Missing data imputation may be used to handle missing data for primary endpoints and secondary effectiveness endpoints.

This study will be conducted according to the protocol, which has ethics committee approval (Hamburg Ethic Committee in Germany: 2024-101358-BO-ff), and all applicable laws and regulatory requirements for each participating country. The results will be disseminated through scientific publications and congress presentations.

NCT06815380 (Pre-results).

Dermoscopy has a proved validity in the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma, which is one of the most aggressive forms of skin cancer. Although some studies have demonstrated a relationship between specific dermoscopic and pathologic melanoma features, there is no solid evidence allowing reliable conclusions. This study will evaluate the evidence regarding this association.

Observational studies eligible for our systematic review will enrol adults with histological cutaneous non-volar melanoma diagnosis and with dermoscopy image analysis. We will search the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library. We will not impose any language or date restrictions. Outcomes of interest include the association of at least one of the melanoma dermoscopy features (irregular pigmentation, blue-white veil, atypical network, multicomponent pattern, atypical dots and/or globules, regression, peripheral tan structureless area, negative network, shiny white structures, atypical vessels and streaks/pseudopods), with melanoma Breslow index or other histopathology characteristics (melanoma subtype, mitotic index and presence of ulceration). Two reviewers will independently screen and search results, extract data from eligible studies and assess risk of bias. The evidence derived by this study will elucidate the possible link between melanoma dermoscopy and histopathology. If we could predict melanoma thickness based on dermoscopy, we would be able to anticipate melanoma treatment with impact on survival.

Ethical approval is not required because this is a literature-based study. It will be published in scientific Pubmed indexed open access journals to ensure its accessibility.

CRD42024564919.

Pre-eclampsia (PEC) is a morbid and potentially lethal complication of pregnancy and is more common in women with risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, autoimmune disease, kidney disease or multifetal pregnancies. Low dose aspirin (ASA) is currently the only prophylactic therapy known to decrease PEC in this patient population. However, currently, there is no prospective literature comparing various low-dose ASA formulations in the risk reduction of PEC. In the USA, the currently available low-dose ASA is over-the-counter and found in 81 mg tablets. Therefore, when clinicians initiate low-dose ASA therapy, they may prescribe one or two tablets of 81 mg per day without comparative evidence to guide their decision. Our objective is to prospectively compare pregnant patients on 81 mg vs 162 mg of ASA and determine a possible dose response in the prevention of PEC.

We designed a pragmatic phase 3 prospective randomised open label blinded-end point clinical trial with parallel assignment between two groups of pregnant people at high risk for PEC, as defined by the US Preventive Services Task Force and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). The primary outcome is the incidence of preterm (

Our research protocol and safety monitoring protocol have been approved by the Weill Cornell Medicine institutional review board (IRB) and the Office of Human Research Protection. Evaluation for adverse events will be monitored throughout the study period. Adverse events will be assessed at each study visit.

NCT04070573