Diabetes is a widespread chronic disease, with steadily rising prevalence in most countries. In 2019, the global prevalence of diabetes was estimated at 9.3%, affecting 463 million people. This figure is projected to rise to 10.2% by 2030 and 10.9% by 2045.2 All people with type 1 diabetes and many people...

The ‘time-limited trial’ for patients with critical illness is a collaborative plan made by clinicians, patients and families to use life-sustaining therapies for a defined duration. After this period, the patient’s response to therapy informs decisions about continuing recovery-focused care or transitioning to comfort-focused care. The promise of time-limited trials to help navigate the uncertain limits and benefits of life-sustaining therapies has been extensively discussed in the palliative and critical care literature, leading to their dissemination into clinical practice. However, we have little evidence to guide clinicians in how to conduct time-limited trials, leading to substantial variation in how and why they are currently used. The overall purpose of this study is to characterise the features of an optimal time-limited trial through a rich understanding of how they are currently shaping critical care delivery.

We are conducting an observational, multicentre, focused ethnography of time-limited trials in patients with acute respiratory failure receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in six intensive care units (ICUs) within five hospitals across the US. Study participants include patients, their surrogate decision makers and ICU clinicians. We are pursuing two complementary analyses of this rich data set using the open-ended, inductive approach of constructivist grounded theory and, in parallel, the structured, deductive methods of systems engineering. This cross-disciplinary, tailored approach intentionally preserves the tension between time-limited trials’ conceptual formulation and their heterogeneous, real-world use.

This study has been reviewed and approved by the University of Wisconsin Institutional Review Board (IRB) as the single IRB (ID: 2022-1681; initial approval date 23 January 2023). Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations, and summaries for the public.

NCT06042621.

In Canada, many families want to breastfeed, but there are several common challenges they may encounter. Currently, 91% of Canadian families initiate breastfeeding after giving birth, yet only 38% of babies are breastfed exclusively to 6 months. In 1991, the Breastfeeding Committee for Canada (BCC) was established to implement the World Health Organization’s Ten-Step Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, a series of evidence-based in-hospital practices to support families to breastfeed. Then, in recognition of the need to support breastfeeding beyond the hospital setting, the BCC expanded the Baby-Friendly Initiative (BFI) to apply the Ten Steps to both hospitals and community health settings. However, uptake of the BFI Ten Steps in community settings has been low and methodology on how to optimise implementation of the Ten Steps in community is not well developed. Therefore, the objective of this project is to develop and evaluate a quality improvement collaborative with 25 community health services from across Canada to learn how to best support the implementation of the BFI Ten Steps in community, with the ultimate goal of improving breastfeeding outcomes.

This protocol describes the activities of the Community Baby-Friendly Initiative Collaborative (CBFI-C) and the methods used to evaluate its effectiveness. We will use the Institute for Healthcare Information Breakthrough Series (IHI-BTS) model, a proven quality improvement model that has been widely used in clinical settings, but is not yet widely used in community settings. The IHI-BTS combines three virtual learning sessions with action cycles that allow the participating sites time to test and track small practice changes. Sites will be asked to track care indicator and breastfeeding outcome data, engage in monthly webinars, receive coaching from trained mentors, participate in focus groups and participate in a final summative workshop. We will use a multi-site case study approach, combining aggregate care indicator data and qualitative data from webinars, focus groups and workshops to evaluate how the CBFI-C model supports community sites in the process of implementing the BFI Ten Steps.

Ethics approval for this evaluation was obtained from the CHIPER Health Research Ethics Board (Number HS26947-H2025:157)). The results of the CBFI-C evaluation will be shared in a report, peer-reviewed publications and presentations to government and academic audiences. The findings will inform effective quality improvement strategies to enhance uptake of the BFI in community health settings.

Polysubstance use (PSU), particularly opioid-involved and stimulant-involved PSU, is a growing issue in the USA. PSU increases the risk of negative health consequences, including infectious diseases, worsening physical and mental health conditions, and overdose-related deaths. These consequences occur in the context of varying health risk behaviours, substance-related preferences, and treatment engagements among people with PSU. To inform improvements in prevention, harm reduction, and substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, additional research is needed to comprehensively understand the current context and drivers of PSU preferences, motivations, and behaviours.

Herein, we describe the protocol for a prospective cohort study designed to capture detailed patterns, profiles, and trajectories of PSU, with the aim of comprehensively examining the drivers of PSU behaviours and SUD treatment utilisation. Adults (ages 18–75; n=400) who engage in PSU will be recruited from healthcare institutions, an established participant database maintained by an adjacent SUD research team, and online advertisements. Study assessments will capture dynamic patterns, choice preferences, and motivators of PSU via behavioural economic (BE) measures, detailed Timeline Follow-Back (TLFB) interviews, and self-administered surveys. The assessment timeline will include a baseline survey and TLFB interview, weekly TLFB interviews for 4 weeks post-baseline, and follow-up surveys and TLFB interviews at 4-, 8-, and 12-months post-baseline.

The study is funded through the National Institutes of Health Helping to End Addiction Long-term (HEAL) initiative and was approved by the University of Michigan Medical Institutional Review Board. Findings will be disseminated to academic, clinical, and community partners through the Michigan Innovations in Addiction Care through Research and Education programme. Results from this study will inform actionable and practical insights relevant to the delivery of personalised care in the context of PSU.

This study aimed to understand the knowledge possessed by informal medicine vendors regarding antibiotics and antibiotic resistance, identify the perceptions held by informal medicine vendors about antibiotics and their uses and examine the practices employed by informal medicine vendors in the sale and distribution of antibiotics.

Exploratory qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and direct observations.

Markets and shops across 11 villages in the Nanoro health district, Burkina Faso.

23 informal medicine vendors, aged between 25 and 55 years and with 8–30 years of experience, were recruited through snowball sampling in the Nanoro health district of Burkina Faso.

Informal medicine vendors exhibited a limited understanding of antibiotics, often confusing them with other treatments and referring to them using local terminologies based on perceived use and effectiveness. Antibiotics were perceived as universal remedies, supported by therapeutic belief, empirical reasoning and community solidarity, with empirical diagnosis, approximate dosing and informal preparation techniques passed on through imitation. These findings emerged across themes including perceptions, symbolic attributes and sales practices.

Informal medicine vendors in rural Burkina Faso demonstrated limited understanding of antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance, with practices shaped by local beliefs and empirical experience. These findings underscore the need for context-sensitive interventions that include tailored education and regulatory engagement to improve antibiotic stewardship and mitigate the spread of resistance.

To examine how cultural health brokers, as trusted intermediaries between formal systems and diverse ethnocultural communities, help navigate decisional conflict and misinformation regarding COVID-19 vaccination and to identify how their work contributes to system resilience in crisis contexts.

A community-based participatory action sensemaking research project to capture the real-time work of cultural health brokers in helping people navigate decisional conflict for vaccination.

Multicultural Health Broker Cooperative in Edmonton, Alberta where brokers speak 54 languages and serve more than 10 000 people from diverse ethnolinguistic communities. 28 cultural health brokers (9 male; experience 4–25 years) contributed to data collection and analysis between 16 September 2021 and 16 December 2021.

The brokers captured real-time reflections and self-interpretations in the SenseMaker platform through a theoretically informed, codesigned, mixed-method data collection tool. The team engaged in 13 weekly, 90 minute, audio-recorded and transcribed sessions: seven focused on understanding and action planning and five reflecting on the SenseMaker data, the focus of the thematic analysis. Data were managed in NVivo (QSR International, Version 12, 2018).

Brokers collected 277 narratives and conducted 13 sensemaking sessions. Understanding and purpose were identified in 68% of narratives as key to achieving coherence; 81% of narratives highlighted trust as crucial to what was needed for action; 62% of narratives reflected on a potential risk, with loss of trust a concern in 70% of them. A rich understanding of the sources of decisional conflict and misinformation was achieved and managed through outreach. There were four entwined components to navigation of the evolving complexity of COVID-19 vaccination: (1) building and sustaining trust; (2) strengthening relationships; (3) creating safe spaces for collective sensemaking and solution finding; and (4) leveraging cultural and social capital to address barriers. Through these mechanisms, brokers reduced decisional conflict and misinformation, supporting informed, values-congruent decisions.

Cultural health brokers, embedded within communities and linked to formal systems, play a critical role in crisis response by fostering trust, mobilising resources and enabling collective sensemaking. This study demonstrates how these intermediaries’ contextually and culturally attuned work provides a model for building system resilience for future crisis response.

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) helps pregnant women quit smoking. Usual National Health Service (NHS) cessation care in pregnancy starts only after women stop smoking and comprises behavioural support and NRT. NRT is stopped if women restart smoking. We hypothesised that NRT would have a bigger effect on cessation in pregnancy if used: (1) to reduce smoking before quitting (‘preloading’), (2) during brief smoking lapses after quitting and (3) to help those who cannot stop smoking, to reduce instead.

A two-arm parallel group, open-label, multicentre, assessor-blind randomised controlled trial. Participants are recruited at hospital antenatal clinics and other NHS settings throughout England and Wales or via social media advertising. Those enrolled are in antenatal care,

Ethics approval was granted by the West Midlands—Coventry & Warwickshire Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 21/WM/0172; Protocol number 21001; IRAS Project ID: 291236). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated to the public, funders, relevant practice and policy representatives and other researchers.

ISRCTN84798566.

Tuberculosis (TB) is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Emerging evidence in high-burden settings suggests significant long-term sequelae among people surviving TB; however, evidence from high-income, low-TB burden settings like Canada is lacking. In a person with TB infection, provision of TB preventive treatment (TPT) can prevent TB disease and its sequelae, but remains underused. We propose the Functional Outcomes, Lung health and Livelihood Outcomes among people With Tuberculosis study, a multicentre, prospective cohort study in Canada to help improve our understanding of the impacts of TPT and TB disease on individuals.

This is a prospective cohort study taking place in Montreal and Vancouver, Canada. We aim to recruit and retain at least 120 people with microbiologically confirmed TB disease, 340 people treated for TB infection and 120 without TB disease or infection who will be considered our unexposed group. All participants must be ≥6 years of age. Participants with TB disease or infection will be recruited within 2 weeks of treatment initiation. We will follow-up unexposed participants and participants with TB disease for 24 months, and participants with TB infection for 12 months. Throughout follow-up, participants will complete assessments measuring lung health and function, quality of life, disability, dyspnoea, psychological distress, as well as changes in employment and direct and indirect costs incurred because of treatment. Among participants with TB disease, our primary outcome is the difference in quality-adjusted life years between participants with TB disease and those unexposed at 24 months. For participants with TB infection, our primary outcome is the identification of non-patient characteristics (eg, patient cost, quality of life) associated with participant decision to discontinue treatment. Patient partners have contributed to the design of the study and will be involved with the study through to its dissemination.

This study has been approved by institutional ethics review boards at The Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre (2025–10344) and The University of British Columbia (H24-02071). All participants will provide informed consent (and assent, if required) prior to participating in the study. We will disseminate study results to participants, national and international organisations, and through open-access peer-reviewed academic journals and conferences.

To evaluate whether implementing the Comprehensive Assessment and Risk Evaluation (CARE) record, developed to operationalise Standard 5: Comprehensive Care of the Australian National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards was associated with improvements in patient safety and quality of care. A secondary objective was to explore staff and patient experiences of implementation.

Mixed-methods pre–post evaluation combining quantitative analysis of routinely collected hospital data with staff surveys and patient interviews.

A metropolitan hospital network in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Quantitative analysis included 88 041 admissions pre-implementation and 23 765 post implementation. Staff surveys were completed by 117 staff (84% nurses, 60% with >5 years at the service). Structured interviews were conducted with 39 patients (mean age 65.6 years, 64% male).

The CARE record was a structured record embedding validated risk assessments (STRATIFY, Braden Scale, Malnutrition Screening Tool, Confusion Assessment Method/4 ‘A’s Test, Broset Violence Checklist, Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale) and care planning into routine workflows, to meet requirements of Standard 5.

Primary outcomes were the incidence of falls and pressure injuries. Secondary outcomes were completion of the CARE record, staff and patient experiences, and documentation of other hospital-acquired complications (HACs) (delirium, malnutrition, violence and aggression, suicide and self-harm). Data were compared for two time periods: 1 January 2016 to 28 February 2019 (before CARE record implementation) and 1 March 2019 to 30 March 2020 (after CARE record implementation but before COVID-19).

Post implementation, overall falls decreased (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.93), though severe falls increased (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.17 to 3.07). Pressure injuries decreased in coded data (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.73) and incident reports (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.92). Documentation of delirium (OR 2.02), malnutrition (OR 2.03), aggression/violence (OR 2.09) and suicide/self-harm (OR 1.92) increased. Half of the staff (50.4%) felt they knew more about patients, but 61.2% reported more time to admit patients. Communication between nursing and allied health improved (65.8%). Patients were generally satisfied, though 50% repeated information frequently and 20% felt unprepared for discharge.

CARE record implementation, mandated by the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care’s Standard 5, was associated with fewer pressure injuries and overall falls (though there was an increase in falls resulting in serious injury), and greater documentation of other complications. Staff and patient experiences highlighted some benefits but also documentation time challenges. Findings provide lessons for the national implementation of Standard 5 and the need to balance structured processes with clinical judgement.

Post-surgical care following cochlear implantation is a pivotal part of the rehabilitation journey for cochlear implant (CI) recipients. However, frequent in-clinic visits, particularly in the first year following CI activation, can place a significant burden on CI recipients. Moreover, the growing number of CI recipients may pose a challenge for CI clinics to provide consistent and lifelong care. Cochlear Remote Care is a platform that enables the delivery of post-surgical care through remote hearing assessments and remote video appointments, offering an opportunity to enhance clinic efficiency, eliminate geographical barriers, reduce financial burdens and provide flexible post-surgical options. The primary objective of this study is to compare self-reported hearing ability in daily life among CI recipients who receive post-surgical care through Remote Care with those receiving routine in-clinic care during the first year following CI activation. Additionally, the study will assess the time and costs associated with these care models for both the clinic and patients.

This multi-centre randomised controlled trial is set to be conducted across 11 clinics in the United Kingdom, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia, with an anticipated sample size of 148 participants. All participants will be adults with post-lingual deafness and unilateral CIs. Following baseline measurements at 3 months post-activation, participants will be randomly assigned to either in-clinic visits or Remote Care appointments. At six and 12 months after activation, participants will complete a comprehensive battery of audiometric tests and questionnaires on patient-reported outcomes, usability and resource utilisation.

Ethics approval has been obtained for each clinical site. Study findings will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publications, lay language summaries and conference presentations.

NCT05552118.

The predisposition to food allergy development and the induction of allergen-specific immune responses appears to be initiated early in infancy. Early exposure to food allergens, such as peanut and cashew nut, via human milk is likely important in initiating oral tolerance and reducing risk of food allergy development. This trial aims to determine if the risk of developing peanut and cashew nut allergy during infancy can be reduced by a high peanut and cashew nut maternal diet during lactation.

This is a multisite, parallel, two-arm (1:1 allocation), single-blinded (outcome assessors, statistical analyst and investigators), randomised controlled trial. Target sample size is 4412 participants (2206 per group). Women (aged 18–50 years) with a singleton pregnancy, who are planning to breastfeed and do not have peanut and/or cashew nut allergies are eligible to participate. After obtaining written informed consent, participants are randomised to either a high peanut and cashew nut diet (at least 60 peanuts and 40 cashew nuts per week) or a low peanut and cashew nut diet (no more than 20 peanuts and 12 cashew nuts per week). Participants are asked to follow their allocated diet from birth to 6 months postnatal. Individual lactation consultant advice and support is provided as required. The study’s primary outcome is food challenge proven IgE-mediated peanut and/or cashew nut allergy during infancy (0–18 months). Key secondary outcomes include infant sensitisation to peanut and/or cashew nut. Analyses will be performed on an intention-to-treat basis according to a prespecified statistical analysis plan.

Ethical approval has been granted from the Western Australian Child and Adolescent Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number RGS0000006685). Trial results will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN ACTRN12624000134527)

Hospital falls persist as a major threat to patient safety. This study aimed to develop an interprofessional reference standard to prevent, manage and report hospital falls.

A Delphi consensus methodology, informed by the Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies guideline, was used to design the reference standard. An interprofessional expert panel (n=47) of health professionals, researchers, policymakers and consumers participated in three Delphi rounds. Following the review of clinical guidelines, an e-Delphi survey was developed and piloted to derive 60 initial items for the standard. Two iterative rounds of e-Delphi surveys were distributed via Research Electronic Data Capture and included free-text questions and 9-point Likert scales. An online consensus meeting followed, to ratify the final standard.

In the first Delphi round, there was over 80% agreement for 44/60 items to be included in the reference standard. This increased to 48/60 items in Round 2. At the final consensus meeting, 12 items still did not reach consensus for inclusion and one was added, yielding 49 items. Items that replicated text according to falls with injury/without injury were combined, resulting in 42 items in the final reference standard. Agreed items included: (1) brief screening of falls risk on hospital admission; (2) comprehensive falls assessment for inpatients who are older, frailer or have complex conditions; (3) single interventions (such as environmental adaptations and exercise); (4) multifactorial interventions; (5) education of patients, families and staff; (6) optimising local falls hospital policies, procedures and leadership capability; (7) optimising documentation and reporting; (8) improving accreditation processes; (9) workforce redesign to augment falls education. Items that did not reach agreement (n=12) pertained to alarms, bed rails, grip socks, artificial intelligence, volunteers and care bundles.

This new reference standard provides a checklist for staff, patients, managers and policymakers to reduce unwanted variations in prevention, management and reporting of hospital falls.

ANZCTR 386960

To meet the elevated nutritional requirements of very low birthweight (

This is a three-arm, pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, randomised clinical trial of 615 human milk–fed infants born either (1) ≤1250 g or (2)

Ethical approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario (CTO) and local research ethics boards that are not CTO members. Study findings will be disseminated to clinicians at seminars and conferences and in peer-reviewed publications.

NCT05308134.

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rapidly progressive, fatal motor neuron disease. Diagnostic delay severely impairs patient access to ALS multidisciplinary clinics, available disease-modifying medications and therapies that may prolong survival.

To investigate how patient and physician perspectives might be leveraged to promote timely ALS diagnosis, and how system-level barriers might be addressed to promote appropriate referral to ALS multidisciplinary care.

A qualitative study in Alberta, Canada, used human-centred design and interviews to map the diagnostic journeys of ALS patients and identify individual-level and system-level diagnostic barriers and opportunities.

30 semistructured interviews (10 patients; 20 physicians) were conducted. Data were inductively analysed with the aid of Miro board software. Patient and physician data were triangulated to identify key phases of the journey from symptom onset to confirmed ALS diagnosis and themes related to the diagnostic barriers and opportunities. Journey maps were created to visualise the diagnostic journey.

Patient journeys were comprised of five phases and commonly involved iterative cycles of referral and testing before an ALS diagnosis was confirmed. Four primary themes related to diagnostic barriers: difficulty recognising and responding effectively to early-stage ALS symptoms, absence of a single definitive diagnostic test, long wait times between referrals and clinical visits, and physician reluctance to pronounce an ALS diagnosis. Analysis indicated three approaches for improving diagnostic processes: increase ALS awareness; improve communication between referring physicians and physicians receiving referrals (consultants); and develop physician, diagnostic testing and multidisciplinary clinic referral forms that will guide symptom assessment and accurate referral.

Timely ALS diagnosis is challenging for patients navigating the frequently prolonged, circuitous diagnostic journey and physicians who struggle with referral pathways and the efficient diagnosis of this rare disease. Findings demonstrate the importance of increased ALS awareness and effective communication and response within referral pathways. Recommendations include strengthening the clinical approach of community-based physicians and supporting access and referral pathways. Current initiatives arising from this investigation seek to achieve meaningful change in timely referrals for progressive neurological diseases like ALS.

Aphasia is a language impairment that affects one-third of people who experience a stroke. Aphasia can impact all facets of language: speaking, understanding, reading and writing. Around 60% of people with aphasia have persistent language impairments 1 year after their stroke, requiring ongoing healthcare and support. In recent years, the internet has become a key resource for the self-management of chronic health conditions. Navigating web content, however, requires language use, and as such, people living with aphasia are more likely to be excluded from digital health and support services. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines exist; however, they do not fully address the unique and diverse needs of people with aphasia, and a significant proportion of websites (over 90%) do not fully adhere to them. This protocol paper describes the first two stages of the Bridging the Digital Divide project, which aims to codesign and develop (a) a web-browser extension to re-render webpages to an ‘aphasia-friendly’ (accessible) format, (b) training tools to help users and health professionals customise the web-browser extension and (c) guidelines for developing communication-accessible websites.

The research will be conducted using experience-based codesign. In Stage 1a, focus groups will be held with (1) people with aphasia, (2) family members or significant others and (3) health professionals working with people with aphasia. Participants will be asked to share their experiences of accessing (or supporting a person with aphasia to access) healthcare, information and support services on the web. The nominal group technique (NGT) will be used to identify priorities for improving web accessibility for people with aphasia. Focus group data will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, and prioritisation data will be analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis. In Stage 1b, eight codesign workshops will be held with representatives of the three key stakeholder groups to iteratively codesign and develop a web-browser extension, training tools and guidelines to support web accessibility.

Ethical clearance for Stage 1a and Stage 1b of this project has been approved by the University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (Stage 1a approval number: 2023/HE000528, Stage 1b approval number: 2024/HE000721). The outcomes of this research will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. A dissemination and celebration event will be held at the completion of the project.

Scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps (collectively known as ‘big picture reviews’) in health continue to gain popularity within the evidence ecosystem. These big-picture reviews are beneficial for policy-makers, guideline developers and researchers within the field of health for understanding the available evidence, characteristics, concepts and research gaps, which are often needed to support the development of policies, guidelines and practice. However, these reviews often face criticism related to poor and inconsistent methodological conduct and reporting. There is a need to understand which areas of these reviews require further methodological clarification and exploration. The aim of this project is to develop a research agenda for scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps in health by identifying and prioritising specific research questions related to methodological uncertainties.

A modified e-Delphi process will be adopted. Participants (anticipated N=100) will include patients, clinicians, the public, researchers and others invested in creating a strategic research agenda for these reviews. This Delphi will be completed in four consecutive stages, including a survey collecting the methodological uncertainties for each of the big picture reviews, the development of research questions based on that survey and two further surveys and four workshops to prioritise the research questions.

This study was approved by the University of Adelaide Human Research Ethics Committee (H-2024-188). The results will be communicated through open-access peer-reviewed publications and conferences. Videos and infographics will be developed and placed on the JBI (previously Joanna Briggs Institute) Scoping Review Network webpage.

VALTIVE1 is a multi-centre, single-arm, non-interventional biomarker study for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Plasma samples (Tie2 concentration) are collected to detect vascular control in tumours during standard treatment with chemotherapy and bevacizumab. This qualitative study embedded in VALTIVE1 aimed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of a potential VALTIVE2 trial. It explored the participants’ perceptions of the study and treatments and how they might feel if bevacizumab were discontinued based on the results from the biomarker test.

This qualitative study used semi-structured telephone interviews, which were analysed using deductive and inductive thematic analysis.

Cancer treatment sites in the UK.

Participants recruited to VALTIVE1 were invited to take part in qualitative interviews. 11 female participants took part from four clinical sites.

Participants reported that they experienced side effects attributed to bevacizumab, including stiffness, pain, fatigue, nose bleeds and muscle aches. Participants felt that combining chemotherapy and bevacizumab may have increased the severity of the side effects they experienced. Most participants felt that it was acceptable, if not preferable, to be allocated to a group in a future VALTIVE2 study where bevacizumab may be discontinued according to the results from the biomarker test. A clear preference of participants was to be informed of the biomarker test results, health status and treatment side effects.

A future trial should consider ensuring all participants have access to test results, as participants indicated a preference to know whether bevacizumab was working and to discontinue bevacizumab if it had not prevented tumour growth based on the biomarker results. Comprehensive and ongoing information and support regarding treatment side effects should be provided to all participants throughout their cancer pathways and trials.

NCT04523116.