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.

Settings with insufficient human resources struggle to provide timely eye care services and information to the population. mHealth (mobile healthcare) is a promising solution; however, evidence on the effectiveness of interactive voice response (IVR) and real-time phone-based education remains scarce, despite their potential to be scalable and cost-effective. This study aims to implement the Virtual Baithak, an interactive mHealth platform, to improve eye-health literacy among older adults residing in rural India. The objectives are to (1) Develop and validate the Virtual Baithak for improving vision health and (2) Determine its effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability among the older adults.

This 3-armed, parallel, randomised controlled trial of 14 months duration will enrol 381 older adults (aged 60 years and above). Participants will be blinded and randomly (computer-generated) assigned to either of the three groups based on the intervention for eye-health education they receive: both IVR and group calls moderated by a healthcare professional, only IVR and usual care. The two intervention arms will receive the information weekly over a 3-month period through the Virtual Baithak platform, which will be designed for this study using a participatory research approach to develop the content. The primary study outcomes are digital health literacy and vision health knowledge scores, measured at baseline and 14 months. The secondary outcomes include m-health technology acceptance and usage practices. A mixed-method process evaluation will be conducted to assess the intervention feasibility and implementation, including in-depth interviews with participants. The qualitative data will be thematically analysed to explore factors that promote or restrain the implementation. The inferential statistical quantitative analysis will be performed using linear mixed models.

The study has been approved by the ‘Institute Ethics Committee,’ PGIMER, Chandigarh, India (PGI/IEC/2022/EIC000282 dated 18 February 2022). The results will be disseminated via presentations and/or publications at the national and international levels.

CTRI/2023/02/049383, dated 1 February 2023.

The interfaces between the fields of communication, education and health have been indicated by international institutions such as the WHO and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. However, hegemonic scientific practices supersede dialogue between the three fields, isolating their practices. This fragmenting tendency is observed in scientific literature, which has created gaps in the dialogue and articulation between communication, education and health. Although health promotion requires both communicative and educational practices, the epistemological, historical, political, cultural and socioeconomic aspects have also engendered tensions between the fields. Communication is often seen as a mere instrument for other practices, rather than a phenomenon that (re)produces meanings and power dynamics. In opposing the reductionist and instrumentalising perspectives of knowledge fields, the primary objective of the scoping review is to map the scientific evidence on the interfaces between communication and education in health to indicate a conceptual framework that articulates communication and education practices within the context of health.

A transdisciplinary team developed this protocol based on the 2024 Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The procedures required to conduct the review were guided by the frameworks proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac et al and Peters et al. The study eligibility criteria were established based on the Problem, Concept and Context outlined in the research questions. Primary and secondary studies will be retrieved from nine sources, covering both conventional and grey literature. These sources include Embase, ERIC, LILACS, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, the Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, and the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. A categorised form will be used for data collection and subsequent analysis. The reporting of the review findings will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

The nature of the research and the use of secondary data sources do not require informed consent forms or approval from ethics committees in Brazil. The scientific findings from the review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, academic conferences and other scientific communication channels.

The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) and is available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Z3CX7.

To address whether eating disorders (ED) or insulin omission (IOM) in adult persons living with type 1 diabetes (pwT1D) are associated with impaired glycaemic control.

Cross-sectional analysis.

The French-Speaking Diabetes Society—Type 1 Diabetes Cohort (SFDT1) is an ongoing epidemiological cohort study that includes pwT1D in France who attend hospitals or private ambulatory diabetes centres.

Adult participants from the SFDT1 study, with data on ED and IOM. The current analysis was performed on data collected during the baseline visit in participants enrolled between December 2020 and March 2024.

Using the SCOFF, a self-reported questionnaire to screen for ED, and a single question on IOM to screen for IOM, we described four categories of pwT1D: no ED & no IOM, ED & no IOM, no ED & IOM and ED & IOM. We performed unadjusted and adjusted (for age, sex, diabetes duration, social vulnerability, smoking, alcohol status and insulin treatment) multinomial logistic regression models with the four categories as the outcome and glycaemic variables as explanatory variables, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) variables and HbA1c. No ED & no IOM was the reference outcome for all comparisons. We stratified each model by sex and fear of hypoglycaemia.

We included 1113 participants, 51% males, median (IQR) age 38 (29–50) years, diabetes duration 21 (12–32) years. Prevalences were as follows: no ED & no IOM: 68% (n=758), ED & no IOM: 11% (n=124), no ED & IOM: 16% (n=177) and ED & IOM: 5% (n=54). With the fully adjusted model, and compared with the group no ED & no IOM, time in range (OR (95% CI) 0.5 (0.4 to 0.7)) and time below range (0.5 (0.3 to 0.8)) were inversely associated with ED & IOM. Moreover, time in range (0.4 (0.4 to 0.5)) was associated with IOM & no ED. Time above range (2.2 (1.6 to 2.9)), Glycaemic Risk Index (1.8 (1.3 to 2.5)), glucose monitoring indicator (2.2 (1.7 to 2.9)) and HbA1c (2.0 (1.5 to 2.5)) were directly associated with ED & IOM. We did not observe associations between CGM variables and ED & no IOM. Most associations were valid in both men and women. The associations were stronger in participants with a fear of hypoglycaemia. However, the associations remained even in people with a fear of hypoglycaemia.

Both ED and IOM are frequent in pwT1D, and IOM seems to be associated with impaired glycaemic control. As our analysis was cross-sectional, we cannot infer causality and cannot know whether IOM was a result of glycaemic control or the inverse (reverse causality). Our results suggest that IOM should be systematically screened in clinical practice. Further research is needed to better identify and care for EDs, with or without IOM, in T1D.

NCT04657783.

To assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy of non-ophthalmologist-led diabetic retinopathy screening (DRS) at health and wellness centres (HWCs) and offline artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted community-based screening, using specialist grading as the reference standard in India.

Pragmatic diagnostic accuracy study in primary healthcare settings. The settings included HWCs and community-based screening sites in rural Block Boothgarh, Mohali District, Punjab, India. A total of 600 people with diabetes aged ≥30 years were enrolled across three screening models: (1) non-ophthalmologist-led DRS at the HWC, (2) AI-assisted smartphone-based DRS in the community and (3) standard referral-based care. Retinal images were captured using non-mydriatic fundus cameras and independently graded by two masked human graders; a senior retina specialist resolved any disagreements. The AI was assessed for its ability to detect diabetic retinopathy (DR) and referable diabetic retinopathy (RDR). Diagnostic performance metrics were reported.

The non-ophthalmologist-led model demonstrated 86.4% sensitivity (95% CI 65.1% to 97.1%) and 94.3% specificity (95% CI 88.5% to 97.7%) for DR detection, with an ungradability rate of 8%. For RDR, sensitivity reached 95.8% (95% CI 78.9% to 99.9%) and specificity was 93.1% (95% CI 88.0% to 96.5%). The offline AI-assisted model achieved 93.3% sensitivity (95% CI 68.1% to 99.8%) and 85.1% specificity (95% CI 76.9% to 91.2%) for RDR, but with a higher ungradability rate (38%), mainly due to cataracts and poor image quality. Both approaches effectively identified referable cases; however, the non-ophthalmologist-led model demonstrated greater accuracy and operational feasibility.

This study demonstrates that non-ophthalmologist-led DRS at HWCs can enhance access to primary care. Offline AI-enabled screening demonstrates potential for community use but is currently limited by image quality and binary classification outputs. Integrating both approaches may strengthen DRS coverage in resource-limited settings.

CTRI/2022/10/046283.

Cancer in adolescents and young adults (AYAs; ages 15–39 years) is a rising global epidemic. Yet, AYAs remain an understudied population, and little is known about what research topics should be prioritised according to those with lived experience. The AYA Cancer Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established to identify the top 10 research priorities for AYA cancer in Canada according to patients, caregivers, and clinicians.

This project followed the James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) methodology that included two national cross-sectional surveys and a final priority setting workshop following an adapted nominal group technique.

A national sample was recruited to participate from across Canada.

Participants were patients, caregivers, and clinicians with lived personal and/or professional experience of AYA cancer in Canada.

In the first survey, open-ended responses were collected from participants about questions they would like answered by research. Responses were collated into overarching summary questions and a literature search was undertaken to verify if questions were true uncertainties and not fully answered by existing evidence. Unanswered questions were ranked by participants in a second survey. The top-ranked questions were prioritised through consensus at the final priority setting workshop. The final outcome was the top 10 priorities for AYA cancer research in Canada.

In the initial survey, 1916 potential research questions were submitted by 275 patients, caregivers, and clinicians. Following data processing, summary question formation, and the evidence check, 58 questions were put forward for interim prioritisation in a second survey (n=285 patients, caregivers, and clinicians). The top 20 questions from the interim prioritisation were ranked at the final priority setting workshop attended by a diverse group of 23 patients, caregivers and clinicians from across Canada. The resulting top 10 priorities reflect topics across the cancer continuum including: diagnostic delays, screening and early detection, novel therapies, psychosocial impacts, end-of-life concerns, and survivorship issues.

This patient-directed research agenda will guide researchers, funding agencies, and policymakers to ensure that future research is aligned with what matters most to the AYA cancer community.

Pain, including phantom limb pain (PLP), residual limb pain (RLP) and low back pain (LBP), is highly prevalent after lower limb amputation (LLA) and compromises quality of life. Although both pain and function have been studied extensively, methods of assessment and reporting vary, limiting comparability. A clearer overview of how these domains are measured and interrelated is needed to guide research and practice.

To synthesise evidence on how postamputation pain and functional outcomes have been assessed and reported in adults with LLA, and to examine reported relationships between pain and mobility/function.

Scoping review guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (inception to 15 August 2025).

Quantitative studies that measured pain and functional outcome in adults with LLA.

Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics, pain measures and functional outcomes in Covidence; findings were narratively synthesised.

Eighty-four studies were included. RLP (n=46), LBP (n=32) and PLP (n=28) were most frequently examined. Pain was mainly assessed by self-report scales; mobility was typically assessed by clinical tests and less often by biomechanical instrumentation. PLP was associated with altered gait and balance deficits; RLP with limited walking distance, asymmetric weight-bearing and reduced community participation; LBP with gait asymmetry, trunk–pelvis discoordination and increased energy cost of walking.

Postamputation pain is often linked to reduced mobility and functional limitations. However, heterogeneous definitions and inconsistent methodology hinder synthesis across studies. Future research should combine validated pain scales with objective analysis, wearable sensors and musculoskeletal modelling to clarify mechanisms and inform rehabilitation.

Limited data exist on temporal changes in antibiotic use in low and middle-income countries. We evaluated trends in antibiotic use at tertiary hospitals in Uganda.

Retrospective trend analysis of a repeated point prevalence survey (PPS).

This study utilised antibiotic use data from quarterly PPS conducted among inpatients at nine regional referral hospitals in Uganda between October 2020 and December 2023.

We determined the proportions of antibiotic use, prescriptions guided by culture and sensitivity tests (CST), WHO AWaRe (Access, Watch and Reserve) categories, and prescriptions without documented indication. Linear regression was used to derive slope coefficients and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Of 15,154 patients surveyed, 8,892 (58.7%) received systemic antibiotics. The median age was 23 years (IQR: 11–38), 5,338 (60.5%) were female, and 4,583 (51.5%) were on treatment for infectious syndromes, including sepsis (1,400, 15.7%) and pneumonia (867, 9.8%). The drug utilisation index (DU75) consisted of ceftriaxone, metronidazole, gentamicin and ampicillin, which accounted for 76.9% (12,291/15,989) of total antibiotic use. The distribution of prescribed antibiotics was 46.6% Access, 45.5% Watch, 0.1% Reserve and 7.7% unrecommended combinations. Overall, 5,402 (60.8%) prescriptions were aligned with national guidelines, 2,147 (24.1%) prescriptions were issued without an indication, and CST guided 271 (3%) prescriptions. Over time, there was no significant change in antibiotic prescription prevalence (slope=0.09, CI –0.93 to 1.10) and prescriptions without indication (slope=–0.70, CI –1.79 to 3.98). However, adherence to treatment guidelines (slope=2.06, CI 0.14 to 3.98) and prescriptions based on CST results (slope=0.62, CI 0.12 to 1.13) significantly increased, while ‘Watch’ antibiotics prescriptions decreased (slope=–0.40, CI –0.63 to –0.17).

The antibiotic prescription rate remained high, with no significant change over time. Improvements were seen in adherence to treatment guidelines, use of CST and reduced use of ‘Watch’ antibiotics. Strengthening antibiotic stewardship is recommended to further improve practices.

Active self-management by patients following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) can reduce recurrent events. Patient education for transitioning from hospital to home promotes effective self-management but can be limited in the acute setting due to time and resource pressures. Patients from ethnic minority and immigrant backgrounds face additional language, cultural and health literacy barriers to receiving patient education. Self-administered virtual patient education presents an innovative solution to these challenges. This study aims to evaluate a co-adapted, virtual avatar nurse-guided, discharge education application (app) for Chinese-speaking patients following ACS.

This multicentre, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial will recruit 98 Chinese-speaking inpatients following ACS with evaluation at 1 and 3 months postdischarge. Control participants in the control group will receive the usual ward-based patient discharge education. Intervention participants will additionally receive the education app installed on their devices before hospital discharge with unlimited access during the study period. Cultural relevance and linguistic accuracy for this Chinese version of an existing app were ensured through co-adaptation with Chinese-speaking consumers; the primary outcome will be coronary heart disease (CHD) knowledge, and secondary outcomes will include knowledge, attitudes and beliefs regarding heart attack symptoms and responses, CHD self-management behaviours, utilisation of healthcare services and quality of life. A process evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the app. Between-group comparisons will be made using 95% CIs, accounting for baseline differences using linear mixed effects or mixed effects logistic regression models.

The Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee has approved this study protocol (26 February 2024, amendment number 2) (2024/STE00147), with site-specific authorisations obtained from each participating hospital. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal articles and presentations at scientific conferences.

ACTRN12624000408583.

Transgender and gender-diverse individuals often face significant barriers to accessing gender-affirming care, such as hormones and/or surgery, leading to poorer mental health, lower quality of life, and higher rates of substance use and suicidal ideation. Vaginoplasty, the most commonly sought genital gender-affirming surgery (GGAS), is desired by over half of all trans women but has been performed in only a minority. This is due largely to limited surgeon availability and long wait times. Peer support has been shown to improve health outcomes and reduce stigma in marginalised populations, including trans communities, but has never been studied for efficacy during the perioperative period of GGAS. Building on priorities identified by multi-stakeholder engagement from the Transgender & Non-Binary Surgery Allied Research Collective, the Support for Transgender and Nonbinary Individuals Seeking Vaginoplasty (STRIVE) study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a centralised peer support and education intervention for patients seeking vaginoplasty, addressing a critical gap in perioperative care.

The STRIVE Study is a pragmatic, multi-site randomised controlled trial enrolling trans adults seeking full depth vaginoplasty. Participants are randomised to one of two arms; enhanced usual care, or a facilitated group intervention. The primary outcome is coping self-efficacy at 6 months, with a secondary outcome of surgical readiness. Primary analysis uses an intention-to-treat approach with linear mixed effects modelling, adjusting for selected baseline values and site. The feasibility evaluation data collected via qualitative interviews will be analysed thematically.

Approvals were granted by the primary site’s Institutional Review Board on 10 May 2024 (STUDY00026957). The trial was registered on 24 May 2024. Results will be published in open access journals and made available to community members in plain language formats.

NCT06436560.