An abnormal composition of gut bacteria along with alterations in microbial metabolites and reduced gut barrier integrity has been associated with the pathogenesis of chronic autoimmune and inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). The aim of the systematic review, for which this protocol is presented, is to evaluate the clinical benefits and potential harms of therapies targeting the intestinal microbiota and/or gut barrier function in AIRDs to inform clinical practice and future research.

This protocol used the reporting guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol. We will search Embase (Ovid), Medline (Ovid) and the Cochrane Library (Central) for reports of randomised controlled trials of patients diagnosed with an AIRD. Eligible interventions are therapies targeting the intestinal microbiota and/or gut barrier function including probiotics, synbiotics, faecal microbiota transplantation, live biotherapeutic products and antibiotics with the intent to modify disease activity in AIRDs. The primary outcome of the evidence synthesis will be based on the primary endpoint of each trial. Secondary efficacy outcomes will be evaluated and selected from the existing core domain sets of the individual diseases and include the following domains: disease control, patient global assessment, physician global assessment, health-related quality of life, fatigue, pain and inflammation. Harms will include the total number of withdrawals, withdrawals due to adverse events, number of patients with serious adverse events, disease flares and deaths. A meta-analysis will be performed for each outcome domain separately. Depending on the type of outcome, the quantitative synthesis will encompass both ORs and standardised mean differences with corresponding 95% CIs.

No ethics approval will be needed for this systematic review. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to disseminate the study results through a peer-reviewed publication.

CRD42025644244.

Hearing loss is highly prevalent and impacts many aspects of a person’s life, including communication, social engagement, employment, general health and well-being. Yet, many people do not access hearing healthcare and are unaware of the range of hearing healthcare options available. Barriers to hearing healthcare include poor understanding of hearing loss and its impact; poor knowledge of help-seeking for hearing healthcare options; minimal support to help decide which option is best; and stigma related to hearing loss. These barriers lead to many people not receiving the hearing healthcare they need. Guided by theories of behaviour change and implementation science, HearChoice, an online tailored decision support intervention, has been co-developed to empower adults with hearing difficulties by offering them choice and control over their own hearing healthcare. HearChoice aims to facilitate informed decisions, accessibility and uptake of hearing healthcare, including a wide range of interventions, for adults with hearing difficulties. The objectives of the trial are to evaluate the effectiveness, health economics and feasibility of HearChoice.

This online randomised controlled trial will recruit participants with hearing difficulties across Australia, with an anticipated sample size of 640. Participants will be randomised to either HearChoice (treatment) or an Australia-specific Hearing Option Grid (active control), both delivered online. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline when the interventions will be offered, at 7 days post-intervention (primary endpoint) and at 3 months post-intervention. An email reminder will be sent at 1-month post-intervention. The primary outcome is decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes include measures of readiness and self-efficacy to take action, hearing-related quality of life and empowerment, assessment of the value and impact of HearChoice, work performance and health, and feasibility measures. Primary analysis will compare outcomes between HearChoice and the active control at the primary endpoint.

The study was approved by the Curtin University Human Ethics Committee (HRE2023-0024). All participants will provide written informed consent prior to participation. A broad dissemination plan of the study findings includes peer-reviewed publications, scientific conference presentations, articles and presentations for the wider community and public written in lay and accessible language, and social media.

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12624001139561).

Communication is a professional competence that all paediatric healthcare professionals must learn and maintain to provide age and developmentally appropriate care. Child-centred communication encourages direct communication with children and adolescents, incorporating the use of play as a communicative strategy. Still, many paediatric healthcare professionals receive little or no formal training in communication and play. A critical barrier to communication training is the limited possibilities for healthcare professionals to take time from their clinical duties. Moreover, few randomised controlled trials have evaluated educational programmes on communication and play for paediatric healthcare professionals, and existing programmes vary significantly in design and duration. This study aims to compare the effects of a 45-min and a 3-hour educational intervention for healthcare professionals on age-appropriate communication and the use of play in clinical paediatric practice.

We will describe a single-centre, randomised, controlled, two-arm, non-inferiority trial. We will recruit 150 healthcare professionals with different professional backgrounds who will be randomised to one of two arms: a 45-min or 3-hour educational intervention on communication and play in paediatric clinical practice. The primary outcome will be their self-efficacy in patient-centredness at 12-week post-intervention, while secondary outcomes will be self-efficacy immediately after the intervention, motivation to engage in the educational activity, cognitive load, self-evaluated knowledge, satisfaction and the impact on individual practice and training needs. Data will be collected through questionnaires at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 12 weeks post-intervention and will be analysed using linear mixed models with random effects to account for clustering and within-subject correlation.

The Danish Data Protection Agency approved the study (P-2020–1144), which will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal and presented at international conferences.

NCT06859632 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

We aimed to determine the prevalence of hospital discharge communication problems in adults of 10 high-income nations and the associated factors.

Secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data.

2023 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey for Adults, including data from residents of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK and the USA.

3763 survey respondents aged 18 and older who reported hospitalisation at least one time in the past 2 years.

Our primary outcome measure is poor discharge communication (PDC), which is a composite variable comprising three questions regarding the provision of written information, follow-up arrangement and discussion of medications at time of discharge.

The overall PDC rate was 17.1%, with the highest in Germany (19.7%) and the lowest in the Netherlands (9.2%). No follow-up arrangement was the most commonly reported problem (22.8%). Respondents who concerned about social service needs and mental health issues were more likely to report PDC.

Providers should consider factors which impact PDC at hospital discharge and tailor communication appropriately. Hospitals, communities and countries should work towards policies that address underlying issues related to social determinants of health, including support for lower-income patients, improved treatment access for patients with physical and mental health conditions, and food and housing stability.

Surgical oncology patients often experience doubts and uncertainties in the preoperative and postoperative periods, which can be addressed remotely through telenursing. Expanding telenursing services could contribute to more comprehensive perioperative care. We conducted a scoping review to characterise these telenursing services, identify their outcome indicators and examine the content of the care delivered.

A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) recommendations.

MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library (VHL), with searches performed up to 5 May 2025.

We included studies that implemented telenursing interventions in the preoperative or postoperative period in adult oncology patients.

Two independent reviewers used a standardised search to select and extract data from the included studies. Study characteristics were presented descriptively using absolute and relative frequencies, and the content of telenursing interventions was organised into a circular thematic matrix.

A total of 37 studies were included, published between 1996 and 2024, conducted in 12 countries and primarily focused on postoperative telenursing via telephone or video calls. Preoperative care focused on psychosocial support and guidance related to surgical preparation. Postoperative topics included surgical wound care; handling of devices such as drains, ostomy bags and catheters; instructions for returning to work and support groups for financial and social assistance. Outcome indicators were primarily related to care, including levels of anxiety, stress, depression and quality of life.

Oncologic surgical telenursing remains primarily focused on postoperative care and the delivery of personalised support. Reporting on the protocols used, frequency and duration of sessions, nurse training and profiles, integration with in-person care workflows and operational cost data could strengthen the knowledge base for perioperative telenursing in oncology.