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.

Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability in the Caribbean, yet there is limited published information on the availability and utilisation of diagnostic imaging and treatment methods. Inequities in healthcare infrastructure, access to neuroimaging and acute treatment options may contribute to poorer outcomes following stroke, particularly in the low-resource settings that characterise most of the Caribbean region. The objective of this review is to map the literature on access to diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for adult stroke care in the Caribbean to identify potential limitations in acute treatment and examine how restricted access may impact outcomes. The resulting data can help inform strategies for improving access to stroke care in resource-limited communities.

We will apply a three-step strategy based on the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework: first, a limited search to identify relevant articles; second, selection of key search terms; third, implementation into a comprehensive search strategy. The query will range from 1 January 1995 to 1 June 2025 (date of final search). Search results will be extracted and screened by two independent reviewers, and findings will be presented in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We will consider studies focusing on ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in the Caribbean, emphasising access to diagnostic imaging, stroke centres, prehospital management and emergent treatment. Studies examining acute stroke management capacity within the region will be considered. Studies will be excluded if they: focus exclusively on primary stroke prevention, postacute care, longitudinal care pathways for stroke victims or paediatric populations; are unrelated to stroke diagnosis or treatment or are conducted outside the Caribbean.

This protocol aims to perform secondary analysis of previously published literature; therefore, ethical approval is not required. The results of this review will be disseminated through academic conferences and peer-reviewed publication.

Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are chronic, inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) of unknown origin, affecting the gastrointestinal tract and often causing extraintestinal symptoms. Conventional treatments (eg, glucocorticosteroids, immunomodulators) and targeted advanced treatments, including anti-TNFα, antibodies to p40 subunit of IL-12/23, antibodies to p19 subunit of IL-23, anti-α4β7 integrin, Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulators, do not achieve sustained responses for all patients, leaving significant unmet therapeutic needs.

This prospective, multi-centre observational study will follow a cohort of 240 patients across multiple study centres within NHS trusts in the UK who are initiating or switching biologics, specifically anti-TNFα and anti-α4β7 integrin for UC, and anti-TNFα, antibodies to p40 subunit of IL-12/2 and JAKi for CD. Through comprehensive profiling of immunological, transcriptional, microbiome, genetic and proteomic markers at baseline, week 12, and week 52, this study aims to uncover non-invasive biomarkers that predict response to these drug classes, ultimately advancing personalised medicine in IBD.

Ethical approval for the Nottingham/AstraZeneca study was granted by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee. Recruitment began in December 2022 and is currently ongoing at 10 NHS Trust sites across the UK. Study findings will be disseminated by publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at relevant national and international conferences.

Glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. Early detection and continuous monitoring are essential to preventing vision loss, yet traditional diagnostic tools remain largely inaccessible in low-resource settings.

This scoping review aimed to map the existing evidence on the use of portable devices for the detection, diagnosis and monitoring of glaucoma.

We conducted a scoping review in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed across major databases to identify studies that evaluated handheld tonometers, portable fundus cameras and visual field testing devices. Data were extracted on study design, population characteristics, devices used, comparators and reported outcomes.

A total of 216 studies published between 1975 and 2024 were included. Most studies (90.3%) were method agreement studies, primarily focused on intraocular pressure (IOP) devices. Only two studies evaluated all three glaucoma assessment domains (IOP, visual fields and fundus imaging). Most studies were conducted in high-income countries, with a smaller number from low- and middle-income countries. Despite variability in performance, many devices demonstrated acceptable agreement with gold standard methods and were assessed in a range of clinical and community settings.

This review highlights the range and characteristics of portable glaucoma devices and their potential for enhancing access to diagnosis and monitoring, particularly in underserved settings. However, the predominance of method agreement studies and the limited integration of multimodal assessments point to gaps in the literature. Future research should focus on comprehensive diagnostic pathways using multiple portable tools and on expanding evaluations in low-resource settings to inform policy and service planning.

To investigate discrepancies in perceptions regarding the accessibility and availability of rest and relaxation (R&R) spaces between hospital doctors in Scotland and NHS Scotland regional health boards (HBs), with the intention of informing best practices for organisational policy on the provision of R&R spaces both now and in the future.

A qualitative study, through an inhabited institutionalism (II) lens, of semi-structured interviews of hospital doctors across the career continuum in Scotland and all NHS regional HBs in Scotland providing written information relating to R&R space provision.

NHS Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Hospital doctors (n=30) who had participated in a larger qualitative study and provided specific insights on R&R spaces. All NHS Scotland regional HBs (n=14).

Although HBs reported the provision of R&R spaces, numerous doctors reported R&R spaces had been removed, relocated or were inaccessible. Furthermore, limited awareness of their availability attributed to inadequate communication, compounded the issue. This divergence between institutional reporting and front-line experience can be interpreted through the lens of II, which posits that institutional polices are often interpreted and implemented differently.

This study emphasises how crucial R&R spaces are to promoting doctors’ well-being especially during the time of high stress. HBs must not only guarantee the accessibility and physical availability of R&R spaces but also enhance their communication regarding the provision.