Socioeconomic inequalities in neonatal mortality are observed globally but gaps remain in the evidence from current reviews, specifically: a wider range of socioeconomic indicators at the individual, household and area level than previous reviews, and alternative time frames to define neonatal mortality. Thus, a comprehensive updated review of the literature is required, focusing on multiple measures of socioeconomic status and alternative time frames, to assess the relationship between maternal socioeconomic status and neonatal mortality in high-income countries.

Three different search approaches will be used: electronic searching of three databases, grey literature searching and reference list checking. First, the three databases Medline, Scopus and Web of Science will be searched using relevant synonyms and adapted terms from medical subject heading terms (MeSH) in Medline for maternal socioeconomic status and neonatal mortality identified from previous systematic reviews on inequalities in adverse pregnancy outcomes. Second, grey literature will be searched by entering the relevant terms into Google. Title, abstract and full text screening will be conducted by the review team against the inclusion and exclusion criteria, with at least 10% checked by a second reviewer to assess for any bias and errors. We will also conduct the kappa statistic for inter-rater reliability. Third, the reference lists of included studies will be reviewed for any additional studies that meet the criteria. Data will be extracted using a data extraction form and extracted studies will be assessed using the Liverpool Quality Assessment Tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted and, where appropriate, meta-analysis will be performed. If the data allow, subgroup analysis by neonatal care population and specific gestational ages will be performed.

Ethical approval is not required as all studies in this systematic review will be publicly available. The findings of this review will be presented at conferences and disseminated in peer-reviewed publications.

CRD42022315407.

Cognitive impairment is present in the majority of individuals with first-episode psychosis (FEP) and is a strong predictor of long-term functional disability. Despite this, evidence-based cognitive interventions are rarely available in routine mental healthcare in low-income and middle-income countries, where most young people with psychosis reside. This protocol describes the CognIFied study, a pilot randomised controlled trial evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of a culturally adapted, task-shifted compensatory cognitive training (CCT) intervention for young adults with FEP in Nigeria.

CognIFied is a multicentre, assessor-blind, parallel-group pilot randomised controlled trial with an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation. The study will recruit 180 young adults aged 18–30 years with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)-defined FEP (onset within the past 5 years) and objective cognitive impairment from three public psychiatric hospitals in Nigeria. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to receive either culturally adapted CCT or an active control condition, Enhanced Recreational Therapy. Both interventions comprise 12 weekly group sessions lasting 60–90 min. CCT is delivered by trained psychiatric social workers using a manualised curriculum co-designed with young people with lived experience. Primary outcomes assess feasibility (recruitment, retention, intervention adherence), acceptability (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8) and intervention fidelity. Secondary outcomes include preliminary signals of effectiveness on global cognitive functioning (Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia) and functional capacity (University of California, San Diego [UCSD] Performance-Based Skills Assessment), assessed at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months. Quantitative analyses will be descriptive and exploratory, supplemented by qualitative inquiry guided by Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research frameworks and an exploratory economic evaluation.

Ethical approval has been obtained from relevant institutional review boards. Findings will be disseminated through open-access publications, policy-focused stakeholder engagement and community dissemination co-led by a Youth Research Team.

ISRCTN44794154.

This study aims to assess travel time, associated costs, challenges and factors influencing healthcare facility choices among persons with cancer in Southern India.

An explanatory sequential mixed methods study.

The study was conducted in the cancer care outpatient department at a tertiary care centre in Puducherry, Southern India.

A total of 192 persons with cancer aged 18 to 65 years, diagnosed with breast, lip and oral cavity, cervical, lung or upper gastrointestinal cancers, and attending the cancer care centre between 2023 and 2024, were enrolled in the study through systematic random sampling. Additionally, 10 in-depth interviews were conducted using purposive sampling.

Of the 192 participants, 89 (46.4%) belonged to a lower socioeconomic group, and 178 (92.7%) reported experiencing financial hardship while undergoing cancer treatment. The median travel time to a tertiary care centre was 4.3 hours (IQR: 2.07–7.3), with a median direct non-medical cost of Indian Rupees (INR) 453 (IQR: 200–987). Median expenditures for travel, food and accommodation were INR 200 (IQR: 123–400), INR 360 (IQR: 150–613) and INR 30 (IQR: 20–60), respectively, per single visit. A significant proportion of participants (n=146, 76%) were unaware of nearby cancer treatment centres and relied on peer recommendations when choosing their place of treatment. Key challenges identified included long-distance travel, financial burden due to high food and transportation costs and limited affordability for accommodation.

The study highlights that prolonged travel time and associated costs pose substantial financial strain on cancer-affected families. Enhancing awareness of available healthcare facilities, implementing patient-friendly travel and accommodation support systems and decentralising cancer care services can improve accessibility and mitigate both travel and financial burdens.

The COmmunity HEalth System InnovatiON (COHESION) project (2016–2019) was a 4-year collaboration between research teams from Mozambique, Nepal, Peru and Switzerland. It conducted formative health system research using tracer chronic conditions, non-communicable diseases (diabetes and hypertension) and one neglected tropical disease per country (schistosomiasis in Mozambique, leprosy in Nepal and neurocysticercosis in Peru).

Findings guided the co-creation of interventions to improve diagnosis and management through a participatory approach with communities, primary healthcare workers and regional health authorities.

As a continuation of this effort, the research team initiated the COHESION Implementation project (COHESION-I) with two objectives: (1) implement and evaluate the context-specific co-created interventions in Mozambique, Nepal and Peru (Component 1) and (2) adapt the COHESION approach to India, a country that did not benefit from a formative phase previously (Component 2). This protocol manuscript focuses on Component 1.

A mixed-methods, pre–post quasi-experimental design will be used, including quantitative, qualitative, economic and process evaluations. Each country will have three arms: (1) co-created and co-designed interventions; (2) only co-designed intervention and (3) the usual care arm. Data will be collected longitudinally over 18 months to assess the effect of the interventions. The main outcomes include patient satisfaction (Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form), health system responsiveness (WHO responsiveness domains) and quality of life (EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels). The qualitative evaluation will explore how satisfaction is perceived among service users with chronic conditions and healthcare workers. Other outcomes per type of evaluation will be considered such as perceived value of health services, cost estimation and acceptability of the intervention components, among others.

Approvals were obtained from Ethics Committees of Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (Peru), Universidade Eduardo Mondale (Mozambique) and Nepal Health Research Council (Nepal). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences.

NCT06989502.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are prevalent metabolic disorders in pregnancy, posing significant risks to maternal and fetal health. This study evaluates the effectiveness of metformin, in combination with lifestyle modifications, compared with lifestyle modifications alone, in reducing the incidence of diabetes, pro-inflammatory liver markers, adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes and total gestational weight gain in pregnant women diagnosed with MASLD in the first trimester.

This parallel-arm, randomised controlled trial will recruit pregnant women (≤14 weeks of gestation) with confirmed MASLD from antenatal clinics of tertiary care public hospitals in Puducherry, India. Participants will be consecutively enrolled until a sample size of 296 is reached. Block randomisation will ensure balanced group allocation, with allocation concealment maintained using sequentially numbered opaque sealed envelopes. The intervention group will receive oral metformin (500 mg two times per day) alongside structured lifestyle modification counselling, while the control group will receive lifestyle modification counselling alone. Primary outcomes include GDM incidence, changes in pro-inflammatory markers, MASLD grading (assessed via liver function tests and ultrasound) and adverse maternal outcomes such as hypertensive disorders, polyhydramnios, genitourinary infections, caesarean delivery and postpartum haemorrhage. Neonatal outcomes assessed include macrosomia, stillbirth, intrauterine death, birth injury, shoulder dystocia, respiratory distress and neonatal hypoglycaemia. The secondary outcome is total gestational weight gain. Participants will be followed at 24–28 weeks, 34–36 weeks and post partum (within 6 weeks of delivery). Data collection will be conducted using a pretested structured questionnaire, with data entry and management performed using REDCap software. Statistical analysis will be conducted using STATA V.4, applying both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. Effect sizes will be reported as proportions and relative risks with 95% CIs, ensuring robust statistical inference.

This study provides a rigorous framework to assess metformin’s role in managing MASLD and preventing GDM, thereby promoting favourable maternal and neonatal outcomes. Findings will contribute to improved clinical management, public health strategies and policy recommendations.

The study was approved by the JIPMER Institutional Ethics Committee (JIP/AEC/2023/01/011), and the findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and academic conferences.

CTRI/2023/12/060930.

Encephalitis is brain parenchyma inflammation, frequently resulting in seizures which worsens outcomes. Early anti-seizure medication could improve outcomes but requires identifying patients at greatest risk of acute seizures. The SEIZURE (SEIZUre Risk in Encephalitis) score was developed in UK cohorts to stratify patients by acute seizure risk. A ‘basic score’ used Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), fever and age; the ‘advanced score’ added aetiology. This study aimed to evaluate the score internationally to determine its global applicability.

Patients were retrospectively analysed regionally, and by country, in this international evaluation study. Univariate analysis was conducted between patients who did and did not have inpatient seizures, followed by multivariable logistic regression, hierarchical clustering and analysis of the area under the receiver operating curves (AUROC) with 95% CIs.

2032 patients across 13 countries were identified, among whom 1324 were included in SEIZURE score calculations and 970 were included in regression modelling. The involved countries comprised 19 organisations spanning all WHO regions.

The primary outcome was measuring inpatient seizure rates.

Autoantibody-associated encephalitis, low GCS and presenting with a seizure were frequently associated with inpatient seizures; fever showed no association. Globally, the score had limited discriminatory ability (basic AUROC 0.58 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.62), advanced AUROC 0.63 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.66)). The scoring system performed acceptably in western Europe, excluding Spain, with the best performance in Portugal (basic AUROC 0.82 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.94), advanced AUROC 0.83 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.95)).

The SEIZURE score performed best in several countries in Western Europe but performed poorly elsewhere, partly due to differing and unknown aetiologies. In most regions, the score did not reach a threshold to be clinically useful. The Western European results could aid in designing clinical trials assessing primary anti-seizure prophylaxis in encephalitis following further prospective trials. Beyond Western Europe, there is a need for tailored, localised scoring systems and future large-scale prospective studies with optimised aetiological testing to accurately identify high-risk patients.

A ‘7-1-7’ timeliness metric, developed for hastening the response to infectious disease outbreaks/pandemics, was adapted to improve screening and managing household contacts (HHCs) of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) patients. The feasibility, enablers, challenges and utility of implementing this modified metric through TB Champions (TB survivors) for HHC management were assessed.

This was an explanatory mixed-methods study with a cohort design (quantitative) followed by a descriptive design with focus group discussions (qualitative).

The study was conducted within routine programmatic settings in public health facilities in six districts from three states of India.

In total, 595 drug-susceptible index pulmonary TB patients registered for treatment in the selected health facilities, and their listed 2108 HHCs were included in the study between December 2022 and August 2023. All 17 TB Champions involved in implementation participated in the focus group discussions.

The primary outcome measures were the percentage of eligible participants receiving the desired service within the ‘7-1-7’ timeliness metric and challenges in achieving the timeliness metrics.

In 89% of 595 index patients, their HHCs were line-listed within 7 days of initiating anti-TB treatment (‘First-7’). In 90% of 2108 HHCs, screening outcomes were ascertained within 1 day of line-listing (‘Next-1’). In 42% of 2073 HHCs eligible for further evaluation, anti-TB treatment, TB preventive treatment (TPT) or a decision to not receive medication were made within 7 days of screening (‘Second-7’). Barriers to TPT uptake included lack of money and daily wage losses for travelling to clinics, reluctance of asymptomatic contacts to take medication and fear of adverse events. TB Champions felt timeliness metrics improved performance in the systematic and timely management of HHCs.

TB Champions found ‘7-1-7’ timeliness metrics were feasible and useful, and national TB programmes should consider their operationalisation.

To estimate the impact of COVID-19 infection on the requirement for social care services among adults aged ≥50 years in North-West London.

Population-based matched cohort study using linked routinely collected electronic social care, primary care and hospital records (the Discover dataset).

Approximately 4.7 million people with a general practitioner record in North-West London.

150 654 adults aged ≥50 years with a first diagnosis of COVID-19 between January 2020 and February 2023 and 547 704 propensity score matched comparators without a COVID-19 diagnosis during the same period.

Social care use and associated costs overall and by specific type (care home, domiciliary care, respite care, social care assessments) stratified by age group, index year, diagnosis setting, severe COVID-19 risk status, frailty and care home admission prior to index. Overall survival was also assessed.

A total of 9174 (6.09%) individuals with COVID-19 required social care use (of any type) during follow-up, 2.54 times (95% CI 2.48 to 2.61; p

This increase in social care utilisation was observed for all age groups. Adults with COVID-19 had over four times higher social care costs than matched comparators (£1276 per person per year (pppy) vs £276 pppy; mean difference +£1000, 95% CI £947 to £1054, p

COVID-19 infection is associated with meaningfully higher social care requirements in the ≥50 years population. Reducing the need for social care use and the associated costs of care should be one of the goals of interventions to reduce the risk and severity of COVID-19 infection.

To assess the impact of opening a large community-based asynchronous review ophthalmic clinic on attendance delays among patients with stable chronic eye disease attending a London teaching eye hospital network.

Interrupted time-series analysis of routine electronic health records of appointment attendances.

A large eye hospital network with facilities across London, UK, between June 2018 and April 2023.

We analysed 69 257 attendances from 39 357 patients, with glaucoma and medical retina accounting for 62% (n=42 982) and 38% (n=26 275) of visits, respectively. Patients over 65 made up 54% (n=37 824) of attendances, while 53% (n=37 014) were from the more deprived half of the population, and 51% (n=35 048) were males.

An asynchronous review clinic opened in a shopping centre in London, in autumn 2021, following the COVID-19 lockdown in spring 2020.

Average attendance delays (days), calculated as the difference between follow-up attendance date and the latest clinically appropriate date determined at the preceding attendance.

Pre-COVID-19, attendance delays for chronic eye disease monitoring were increasing by 0.9 days per week (95% CI, 0.8 to 0.9) on average, worsening to 2.0 days per week (95% CI, 2.0 to 2.0) after the first COVID-19 national lockdown, mid-March 2020. Opening the asynchronous review clinic increased appointment capacity, with delays decreasing on average by 8.1 days per week (95% CI, 8.1 to 8.2) shortly after opening. The rate of decrease slowed to 0.3 days per week (95% CI, 0.3 to 0.3) after 5 months. We found no significant differences in average attendance delays by age, gender or level of deprivation.

The asynchronous review clinic significantly reduced attendance delays across the hospital network, addressing pre-existing backlog for stable chronic eye diseases. The reduction appeared to be maintained after the initial backlog had been cleared.

The purpose of this study was to analyse the speech-language pathology (SLP) literature from 2012 to 2022 and evaluate authorship trends and factors associated with gender disparities.

Authorship across journals published by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) was evaluated. Outcomes collected from each article included the gender of the first and senior authors, author department affiliations, study type, reported funding source and the country of origin. Three sets of linear regression models were explored to determine the probability of male first authorship, of male senior authorship, and of a study being funded.

A total of 2754 articles were identified for inclusion. The majority of the literature was authored by females, with 77% of first authors and 68% of senior authors being female. Studies with a male senior author were shown to be 4.05–4.67 times more likely to have a male first author than with a female senior author. Male senior authors were over-represented relative to their proportion of ASHA membership compared with female senior authors. Male authorship was associated with certain subtopics, including voice, stuttering and motor speech. Funding probability decreased for all authors regardless of gender between 2012 and 2022.

Implicit gender bias and societal gender stereotypes lead to a greater number of women in the field of SLP; the same biases and stereotypes often limit the research productivity and academic leadership potential of women in the field. Addressing these biases and stereotypes is vital to move towards gender equity in the field.