The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) approach initiated by the National Institute of Mental Health provides a comprehensive framework for guiding research on mental illness and health. Since retrospective studies have indicated associations between RDoC characteristics and clinically relevant as well as care-relevant outcomes, there is a need for prospective, theory-driven investigations that systematically link a priori defined assessments of RDoC constructs to clinically and care-relevant outcomes in a transdiagnostic psychiatric sample.

This prospective observational study assesses six domains—Positive Valence Systems, Negative Valence Systems, Cognitive Systems, Social Processes, Arousal and Regulatory Systems and Sensorimotor Systems—employing a comprehensive set of self-report and additional paradigms to assess cognitive functioning developed a priori in alignment with the RDoC framework while also assessing clinically and care-relevant variables (eg, length of hospital stay). A total of 300 adult participants will be recruited among in- and outpatients of two psychiatric hospitals in Germany (patient group) as well as from the general population (healthy control group). Including healthy individuals will allow for the investigation of continuous variations in psychological functioning rather than categorical distinctions between health and disease. Data collection includes self-reports, clinician ratings, file review and behavioural assessments. Electroencephalography is recorded in a subgroup of participants. A confirmatory factor analysis will be conducted to reproduce the factor structure and regression models will be used to investigate associations between RDoC domains and clinically relevant as well as care-related variables.

Ethics approval was obtained from the local ethics committee of the Brandenburg Medical School—Theodor Fontane (E-01-20220822). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences.

Streptococcus pneumoniae serotype 3 (SPN3) remains a significant contributor to invasive pneumococcal disease globally, despite its inclusion in widely administered vaccines. The next generation of pneumococcal vaccines may confer better protection against this serotype, reducing disease burden. We describe an ethically approved protocol for a double-blind randomised controlled trial assessing the impact of VAXNEUVANCE (15-valent pneumococcal conjugated vaccine (PCV15)) and 0.9% saline (placebo) on the acquisition, density and duration of SPN3 carriage using a controlled human infection model.

Healthy adults aged 18–50 years will be randomised 1:1 to receive PCV15 or placebo. Participants will be considered enrolled on the trial at vaccination. One month following vaccination, all participants will be intranasally inoculated with SPN3. Following inoculation, participants will be followed up on days 2, 7, 14 and 28 to monitor safety, SPN3 colonisation status, density and duration, as well as immune responses. The primary endpoint of the study is to assess the rate of SPN3 acquisition between vaccinated and unvaccinated participants defined by classical microbiological methods. Secondary endpoints will determine the density and duration of SPN3 colonisation and compare the immune responses between study groups. An exploratory cohort of 5 participants will be asked to consent to a nasal biopsy procedure during a screening visit and a second nasal biopsy 28 days after PCV15 vaccination. This cohort will only receive PCV15 and will not be challenged. Through this exploratory cohort, we will explore gene expression changes induced by PCV15 vaccination and their visualisation (spatial location) within the nasal tissue.

This protocol has been reviewed by the sponsor, funder and external peer reviewers. The study is approved by the NHS Research and Ethics Committee (Reference: 24/SC/0388) and by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (Reference: CTA 21584/0485/001-0001).

NCT06731374 – ISRCTN91656864.

Penicillin allergy is a significant barrier to optimal antibiotic stewardship, contributing to increased antimicrobial resistance, higher treatment costs, prolonged hospital stays and elevated mortality rates. However, approximately 90% of penicillin allergy labels are disproven on evaluation. Risk stratification-based penicillin allergy evaluation (PAE) has proven safe and effective outside allergology departments, yet its adoption in routine clinical practice remains limited. This study aims to examine the implementation of a risk stratification-based PAE programme across hospitals in Western Norway.

We aim to examine implementation of a risk stratification-based programme for evaluating and de-labelling declared penicillin allergy in Western Norway hospitals in a multicentre study. The study employs a combined stepped wedge- and interrupted time series design. It includes hospitals of varying service levels in both urban and rural settings. Each participating centre receives 12 months of active implementation support, followed by a 6 month postintervention evaluation. The study is guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change. Implementation outcomes assessed include acceptability, fidelity, adoption, penetration, feasibility and sustainability.

The study was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee of Western Norway (approval number: 199210). All legal and formal research requirements are met. Results will be published open access in peer-reviewed journals and included in the first author’s publicly available PhD. Nationwide implementation of PAE is planned, informed by the study’s findings.

Current Research Information System (Cristin) in Norway project identification number: 2500736.

As of 2024, 123.2 million people had been forcibly displaced as a result of persecution, armed conflict or climate-related catastrophes, and these numbers are predicted to rise. There is a growing awareness of possible intergenerational effects of trauma on life-course health and well-being, however few studies have followed individuals longitudinally starting prenatally. This paper describes the first large prenatal birth cohort study in a refugee context in a lower middle-income country. This study aims to investigate the potential lifespan health and developmental implications of being born into a protracted humanitarian context, and what factors can buffer from the adversity posed by conflict and displacement.

We outline our approach of recruiting, consenting and gathering data from pregnant Rohingya refugee and host community women (N=2888; 80% Rohingya) over the course of 12 months in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.

A fifth wave of data collection, when children were 6 months old, was completed in April 2025. Rohingya women were substantially less literate; were marrying and having children at slightly younger ages, were more likely to live in crowded, resource-limited households and exhibited higher rates of clinically significant post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety than host community women.

There is a critical need for research in displaced populations in order to elucidate potentially lasting transgenerational impacts of experiencing conflict and displacement trauma, and the prenatal and postnatal factors that support health and development across the life span. The next follow-up is planned when the children turn 36 months of age (starting March 2026).

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a notable decline in emergency department (ED) usage in many jurisdictions. This study assessed changes in ED use during this period and explored how the pandemic may have aggravated existing healthcare access inequities.

Our primary objective was to assess pandemic-related changes to ED visits and emergency hospitalisations for distinct demographic groups.

We conducted a retrospective observational study using population-based provincial administrative data.

We analysed data from all the 109 EDs and urgent care centres in Alberta, Canada, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 March 2020 to 30 June 2020), and during the corresponding (control) period 1 year earlier. We conducted subgroup analyses by age, First Nations status, sex, location and material deprivation. We repeated all analyses for pre-selected life-threatening emergency diagnoses.

We examined outcomes for a priori subgroups, including female and ‘other’ sex patients, paediatric patients (age 0–17 years), seniors (age 65 years and older), patients living in remote areas (greater than 200 km from an urban centre), First Nations members and patients living in materially deprived postal codes falling into the two most deprived Pampalon Index quintiles.

Primary outcomes were number of ED visits, number of ED visits with admission to hospital and number of ED visits resulting in patient death in the ED. A secondary outcome was change in ED use for life-threatening diagnoses (eg, cardiac conditions and hepatic disease).

ED visits in the COVID-19 period decreased by 34% (Poisson means test p

Reductions in critical emergency care and emergency hospital admissions were unequally distributed across demographic groups during the COVID-19 period. Study methods could be used to monitor and support equitable access to emergency care among distinct populations.

Mitochondrial dysfunction and disrupted cerebral energy metabolism have been increasingly linked to the pathophysiology of schizophrenia. Preclinical studies suggest that certain atypical antipsychotics may exacerbate mitochondrial dysfunction by inhibiting respiratory complex I, contributing to adverse effects. Risperidone, a dopamine D2/serotonin 5-HT2 antagonist, and aripiprazole, a partial dopamine D2 agonist, were selected because of their contrasting pharmacological profiles and reported differential effects on mitochondrial complex I activity. Despite these findings, the clinical implications remain poorly understood. This randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate and compare the biochemical and clinical effects of risperidone and aripiprazole on mitochondrial dysfunction in patients with schizophrenia.

In this randomised, open-label, parallel-arm clinical trial, 60 patients with schizophrenia who were drug-naïve or had not taken any antipsychotic drugs for at least 4 weeks before recruitment were randomly assigned to risperidone or aripiprazole treatment for 12 weeks, with inclusion of an additional group of 30 healthy individuals for baseline comparisons. The primary outcome is the change in mitochondrial respiratory chain complex I concentration in platelets, and secondary outcomes include serum lactate, pyruvate, creatine kinase levels and Newcastle Mitochondrial Disease Adult Scale (NMDAS) scores. Clinical efficacy and safety are evaluated using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and monitoring treatment-emergent adverse events. Intention-to-treat analysis will be done for all parameters using suitable statistical tools.

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee and the study conformed to the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki and ICMR’s national ethical guidelines for biomedical and health research involving human participants (2017). Written informed consent will be obtained from the legally authorised representative of the patients. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conferences to inform safer treatment strategies for schizophrenia.

NCT06236451.

Although as many as 92% of survivors of physical intimate partner violence (IPV) report impacts to the head and/or non-fatal strangulation (NFS) that raise clinical suspicion of brain injury (BI), there are no evidence-based methods to document and characterise BI in this vulnerable population, limited clinical practice guidelines and insufficient understanding about long-term risks for conditions including Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). This leaves most survivors of IPV-caused BI (IPV-BI), overwhelmingly women, without adequate access to medical care and support, safe housing, back-to-school/work accommodations or follow-up care for long-term neurocognitive health. Although traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an established ADRD risk factor, little is known about the attributable risk of ADRD due to IPV-BI, particularly in women.

Our overarching objectives are to (1) use plasma biomarkers as novel tools to assist clinicians to improve diagnosis of IPV-BI at the acute, subacute and chronic stages in a manner sensitive to the needs of this vulnerable population and (2) raise awareness of the importance of considering IPV-BI as a potential ADRD risk factor. A prospective observational study funded by the US Department of Defense (HT9425-24-1-0462), Brain Canada (6200) and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (523320-NWT-CAAA-37499) leverages collaborative research at multiple clinical sites in British Columbia to maximise equity, diversity and inclusion among participants, with a target enrolment of n=600 participants.

The Advocates, Academics, Survivors and Clinicians to END Intimate Partner Violence Biomarkers study, which is predicated on pre-specified research questions, represents one of the most significant community-based studies on plasma biomarkers affected by an IPV-BI incident. Of particular significance is the fact our study uses robust biomarker approaches being applied in the TBI and ADRD fields to determine how the biomarker profile after IPV-BI compares to typical TBI and the early stage of neurodegenerative disorders.

This study was approved by the University of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board (H24-01990, H22-02241 and H16-02792) and the Island Health Research Ethics Board (H22-03510). Upon publication of primary papers, de-identified data and biospecimens will be made widely available, including the US Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) federated database. Our data and integrated knowledge translation activities with persons with lived experience of IPV-BI and those working in the healthcare sector will be synthesised into co-designed and implemented knowledge tools to improve outcomes for survivors of IPV-BI.

Millions of patients receive general anaesthesia every year with either propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) or inhaled volatile anaesthesia (INVA). It is currently unknown which of these techniques is superior in relation to patient experience, safety and clinical outcomes. The primary aims of this trial are to determine (1) whether patients undergoing (a) major inpatient surgery, (b) minor inpatient surgery or (c) outpatient surgery have a superior quality of recovery after INVA or TIVA and (2) whether TIVA confers no more than a small (0.2%) increased risk of definite intraoperative awareness than INVA.

This protocol was co-created by a diverse team, including patient partners with personal experience of TIVA or INVA. The design is a 13 000-patient, multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised, comparative effectiveness trial. Patients 18 years of age or older, undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery requiring general anaesthesia with a tracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway will be eligible. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to one of two anaesthetic approaches, TIVA or INVA, using minimisation. The primary effectiveness endpoints are Quality of Recovery-15 (QOR-15) score on postoperative day (POD) 1 in patients undergoing (1) major inpatient surgery, (2) minor inpatient surgery or (3) outpatient surgery, and the primary safety endpoint is the incidence of unintended definite intraoperative awareness with recall in all patients, assessed on POD1 or POD30. Secondary endpoints include QOR-15 score on POD0, POD2 and POD7; incidence of delirium on POD0 and POD1; functional status on POD30 and POD90; health-related quality of life on POD30, POD90, POD180 and POD365; days alive and at home at POD30; patient satisfaction with anaesthesia at POD2; respiratory failure on POD0; kidney injury on POD7; all-cause mortality at POD30 and POD90; intraoperative hypotension; moderate-to-severe intraoperative movement; unplanned hospital admission after outpatient surgery in a free-standing ambulatory surgery centre setting; propofol-related infusion syndrome and malignant hyperthermia.

This study is approved by the ethics board at Washington University, serving as the single Institutional Review Board for all participating sites. Recruitment began in September 2023. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, internet-based educational materials and mass media.

NCT05991453.

Excessive sedentary behaviour (SB) is highly prevalent among children and adolescents and young adults (AYAs) treated for cancer. Although SB is associated with adverse health outcomes in adults with cancer, little is known about SB in younger cancer patients and survivors. In this scoping review, we aim to summarise current literature on (1) the association between SB and clinical outcomes and (2) results of intervention trials to reduce SB, specifically in paediatric and AYA cancer patients and survivors.

The scoping review will follow the five stages described in the Arksey and O’Malley methodology framework. We will conduct a comprehensive search in five varied electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and SportDiscus) for original articles published in peer-reviewed journals since 1 January 2000, and search reference lists of identified articles and previous review articles. All original research article types will be considered (ie, cross-sectional, cohort, interventional trials). Two reviewers will independently screen all articles based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, including (1) more than half the sample at the time of study must have been children (0–14 years old) and/or adolescent and young adults (AYAs, 15–39-year old) who were being or had been previously treated for cancer and (2) reporting of SB. Data will be extracted as a descriptive and quantitative summary of each study’s key characteristics and results. Study-specific quality assessment will be performed using established tools. Results will be presented in evidence tables with an accompanying narrative summary.

Ethics approval is not required as only publicly available data will be analysed. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and may be presented at a scientific conference.

The protocol is registered in Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ua8z9).

SARS-CoV-2 is now endemic and expected to remain a health threat, with new variants continuing to emerge and the potential for vaccines to become less effective. While effective vaccines and natural immunity have significantly reduced hospitalisations and the need for critical care, outpatient treatment options remain limited, and real-world evidence on their clinical and cost-effectiveness is lacking. In this paper, we present the design of the Canadian Adaptive Platform Trial of Treatments for COVID in Community Settings (CanTreatCOVID). By evaluating multiple treatment options in a pragmatic adaptive platform trial, this study will generate high-quality, generalisable evidence to inform clinical guidelines and healthcare decision-making.

CanTreatCOVID is an open-label, individually randomised, multicentre, national adaptive platform trial designed to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of therapeutics for non-hospitalised SARS-CoV-2 patients across Canada. Eligible participants must present with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, confirmed by PCR or rapid antigen testing (RAT), within 5 days of symptom onset. The trial targets two groups that are expected to be at higher risk of more severe disease: (1) individuals aged 50 years and older and (2) those aged 18–49 years with one or more comorbidities. CanTreatCOVID uses numerous approaches to recruit participants to the study, including a multifaceted public communication strategy and outreach through primary care, outpatient clinics and emergency departments. Participants are randomised to receive either usual care, including supportive and symptom-based management, or an investigational therapeutic selected by the Canadian COVID-19 Outpatient Therapeutics Committee. The first therapeutic arm evaluates nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid), administered two times per day for 5 days. The second therapeutic arm investigates a combination antioxidant therapy (selenium 300 µg, zinc 40 mg, lycopene 45 mg and vitamin C 1.5 g), administered for 10 days. The primary outcome is all-cause hospitalisation or death within 28 days of randomisation.

The CanTreatCOVID master protocol and subprotocols have been approved by Health Canada and local research ethics boards in the participating provinces across Canada. The results of the study will be disseminated to policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals to ensure that findings are accessible to the broader scientific and medical communities. This study was approved by the Unity Health Toronto Research Ethics Board (#22-179) and Clinical Trials Ontario (Project ID 4133).

NCT05614349

While survival rates following neonatal surgery for congenital heart disease (CHD) have improved over the years, neurodevelopmental delays are still highly prevalent in these patients. After correcting for the CHD subtype, the severity of developmental impairment is dependent on multiple factors, including intraoperative brain injury, which is more frequent and more severe in those undergoing aortic arch repair with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA). It is proposed that brain injury may be reduced if cooling is stopped at the point of electrocerebral inactivity (ECI) on electroencephalogram (EEG), but there is limited evidence to support this as few centres perform perioperative EEG routinely. This study aims to assess the feasibility of EEG monitoring during neonatal aortic arch repair and investigate the relationship between temperature and EEG to inform the design of a future clinical trial.

Single-centre prospective observational cohort study in a UK specialist children’s hospital, aiming to recruit 74 neonates (≤4 weeks corrected age) undergoing aortic arch repair with DHCA. EEG will be acquired at least 1–3 hours before surgery, and brain activity will be monitored continuously until 24 hours following admission to intensive care. Demographic, clinical, surgical and outcome variables will be collected. Feasibility will be measured by the number of patients recruited, data collection procedures, technically successful EEG recordings and adverse events. The main outcomes are the temperature at which ECI is achieved and its duration, EEG patterns at key perioperative steps and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 24 months postsurgery.

The study was approved by the Yorkshire and The Humber Sheffield National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (20/YH/0192) on 18 June 2020. Written informed consent will be obtained from the participant’s parent/guardian prior to surgery. Findings will be disseminated to the academic community through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences. Parents/guardians will be informed of the results through a newsletter in conjunction with local charities.