The Asia-Pacific Colorectal Screening (APCS) score is a validated tool for predicting advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) in the Asia-Pacific region. An adjusted APCS (A-APCS) score was recently developed by incorporating body mass index into the original score and was reported to outperform the original score but lacked external validation. This study aimed to compare the A-APCS score with the original APCS score in asymptomatic Vietnamese individuals.

A cross-sectional study.

Dai Phuoc Polyclinic, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Asymptomatic individuals underwent colonoscopy screening.

Participants were categorised into three risk groups based on the sum of the APCS and A-APCS scores: average risk (AR), moderate risk (MR) and high risk (HR). The performance of the two scores was compared via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and McNemar tests.

A total of 714 participants (median age 51 years, range: 18–79; female-to-male ratio: 1:1.46) were included, with an ACN prevalence of 9.0%. Both scores indicated effective predictive ability for ACN in the HR group compared with the AR group, with OR=3.878 (95% CI 1.777 to 8.068) and 3.266 (95% CI 1.617 to 6.595), respectively. The A-APCS score was more effective than the APCS score in predicting ACN in the MR group than in the AR group. However, no significant differences in area under the ROC curve were observed between the two scores for ACN prediction.

Compared with the APCS score, the A-APCS score may not provide improved ACN risk stratification in asymptomatic Vietnamese individuals. Both scores are suboptimal and should be used to prioritise, rather than exclude, candidates for colonoscopy.

Implementation of low-intensity, evidence-based psychological interventions can help meet the mental health and psychosocial needs of people with cancer, especially in low-resource settings where there is a dearth of mental health specialists. In this study, we will conduct a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the stress management intervention Self-Help Plus, which has been translated and adapted to Vietnamese, vSH+, among people newly diagnosed with breast or gynaecological cancer in Viet Nam.

At six participating hospitals, individuals diagnosed with breast or gynaecologic cancer within the past year will be recruited, consented and randomised into either enhanced usual care (EUC) or EUC plus the vSH+ intervention, which consists of four sessions each lasting approximately 75 min. Quantitative surveys will be administered at three time points: enrolment/baseline (T0), after 6 weeks (T1) and after 4 months (T2). A qualitative evaluation component, which will include in-depth interviews with patients, implementers and healthcare staff and managers, as well as focus group discussions with caregivers, will assess the acceptability and feasibility of the vSH+ intervention.

Ethical reviews for the study were obtained from Boston University, Hanoi University of Public Health (HUPH) and all the participating hospital sites. On completion of data collection and analyses, the research team will prepare and submit abstracts to scientific conferences as well as manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals. We will also conduct dissemination events to report the trial results to relevant stakeholders.

NCT06398067.

To partner with healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to identify top 10 research priorities within universal child and adolescent health promotion and disease preventive services.

The study used an adapted James Lind Alliance (JLA) approach. This included a priority setting partnership within the field of municipal health promotion and preventive services for children and adolescents, the gathering of research needs as reported by a national sample of healthcare professionals and other stakeholders and the sorting, evidence checking and final prioritisation of two top 10 lists corresponding with the two municipal service areas: (1) pregnancy care and child health centres 0–5 years and (2) school health service and youth health centres. The research needs were collected using an online survey asking: ‘In your opinion, what should scientific communities in Norway conduct research on to enhance child and adolescent health promotion and preventive services?’. Suggested needs framed as topics were sorted and categorised in Microsoft Excel. The digital survey Nettskjema was applied for final prioritisation by voting.

Municipal child and adolescent health promotion and disease prevention services in Norway.

Altogether, 1141 healthcare professionals and other stakeholders (government administrators and university staff).

The participants submitted a total of 1780 research needs. Following the steps of the JLA priority setting process, the two final top 10 lists were generated. The lists include research priorities relating to, for example, health literacy, mental health promotion, counselling and teaching, follow-up of children and families in vulnerable positions and interdisciplinary collaboration.

Research priorities for child and adolescent health promotion and preventive services were identified through structured user involvement of healthcare professionals and other stakeholders using the JLA framework. The two lists address key knowledge gaps and reflect current societal and professional challenges. The findings can enhance research relevance, foster collaboration and guide research and research funding.