This study aimed to explore perceptions of the Paediatric Improvement Collaborative’s (PIC’s) Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) among clinicians, with a focus on awareness, frequency of use, applicability and areas for improvement.

Cross-sectional online survey and semi-structured interviews.

Clinicians working in all Australian states and territories. Recruitment was via non-probability convenience sampling. Invitations to participate in the online survey were posted on national- and state-level paediatric organisations, networks and groups. Survey participants could express interest in taking part in a follow-up online interview.

A total of 466 clinicians, including consultants/specialists (46.1%), specialists in training (residents/registrars: 20.4%), nurses (17.8%), allied health professionals (4.7%) and general practitioners (3.6%) participated in the survey. Findings indicated a high level of usage, with two-thirds of participants (63.9%) using the guidelines weekly. Most participants (91.8%) deemed the CPGs highly applicable to their practice settings, and over half (57.9%) had referred to more than 10 different PIC CPGs in the past month. Patterns of use reflected experience, seniority and scope of practice, with utilisation significantly higher among specialists in training, those working in emergency settings and those with less practising experience. Ten clinicians were interviewed to gain deeper insights, reinforcing that PIC CPGs serve multiple purposes, such as to check practice and for self-learning, for teaching more junior staff, and to reinforce treatment decisions with parents and patients. The guidelines were noted as being useful for all members of the multidisciplinary team in providing consistent language and uniform care. Key areas for improvement included enhancing accessibility in time-pressured environments, such as incorporating human factors-based navigation features and standardised layouts, and integrating additional tools and localised referral information.

PIC CPGs are viewed as a source of credible, evidence-based information that was valued across medical, nursing and allied health professionals.

The EPHOR-NIGHT cohort was established to investigate how night shift work influences biological pathways and chronic disease risk using a comprehensive working-life exposome approach, focusing on cardiometabolic, mental health, cognitive and biological ageing outcomes.

The cohort includes 937 workers aged 20–65 years (88% female), primarily from the healthcare sector (96%) in Spain, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands. Participants were categorised as permanent day (39%), permanent night (35%) or rotating/other shift workers (26%). Data collection included questionnaires, daily ecological momentary assessments, wearable sensors tracking light, physical activity, heart rate and environmental exposures and biological samples (blood collected once and saliva collected during five points across the day), with harmonised protocols across countries.

From the 937 participants contributing data to the cohort, 708 had complete information from questionnaires, sensors and blood and saliva, with subsets undergoing advanced biological analyses, including genomics, targeted and genome-wide DNA methylation, telomere length and mtDNA copy number, metabolomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, hormone profiling and inflammatory biomarkers and blood metals. Many reported prevalent chronic conditions, including anxiety (27%), depression (18%) and metabolic disturbances. Night shift and rotating shift workers had greater exposure to long shifts and more scheduled rest days compared with day workers. Sleep duration and quality were poorest among permanent night shift workers.

A 2-year follow-up was completed in June 2025, including the collection of additional biomarker data, psychosocial work environment data and data related to female sexual and reproductive health. Findings from the EPHOR-NIGHT study aim to inform prevention strategies and occupational health policies. Data will be made available to support broader research efforts on shift work and health.

Black and Asian women experience significantly higher rates of mortality and morbidity perinatally compared with white women and are more likely to lose their babies. These groups are also under-represented in clinical research, resulting in evidence that may not be generalisable. Tools have been developed to facilitate the inclusion of ethnic minority groups, but it is unknown to what extent representation and inclusion are considered in maternity trials.

To provide an overview of how ethnically diverse recruitment is considered and reported in maternity trials in the UK.

A scoping review was conducted, undertaking a systematic search to identify published trial protocols and their subsequent results papers, conducted within the UK, recruiting women during pregnancy or within 6 weeks postnatally between 2004 and 2024.

Data was extracted from protocols on whether representation of participants was considered in the study design and if specific recruitment and retention strategies were planned for ethnic minority groups.

Data extracted from results papers identified whether representation of participants was discussed and if recruitment strategies were discussed; these were compared against the protocol.

A total of 96 published protocols met the inclusion criteria; 8 mentioned specific recruitment strategies and 5 mentioned specific retention strategies. Only two included both recruitment and retention strategies. The most common strategies included providing different types of language support and adapting interventions to be culturally appropriate. Strategies were not evaluated.

67 results papers were available. Ethnicity was reported in 57 papers, with heterogeneity of categories between papers. Only 32 papers discussed representativeness of participants.

Few maternity trials report considerations on how they ensure they are recruiting and retaining ethnically representative participants. Minimal discussion is undertaken around the extent to which trial participants reflect the population to which findings will be applied.

Further work is needed to support implementation and evaluation of inclusive research guidance. Failing to ensure those from ethnic minority groups are included in research can exacerbate inequalities.

The study sought to understand the experiences of patients with thyroid cancer (TC) from their own perspective and to identify the factors that affected their well-being.

This was a qualitative study based on semistructured interviews that collected both prospective and retrospective longitudinal data.

Patients were initially recruited from one National Health Service (NHS) Trust and from the contact list of a TC charity.

25 participants took part in the study: 22 female and 3 male. The inclusion criteria were: (1) adults over 18 years of age; (2) patients diagnosed with papillary or follicular TC within 5 years of diagnosis and (3) patients able to give informed consent. The exclusion criteria were: (1) diagnosis of anaplastic TC; (2) diagnosis of terminal TC with a short life span prediction and (3) codiagnosis of another condition in addition to TC.

Patients’ psychological health, physical health, relationships, employment and finances are all likely to be affected by the diagnosis and treatment of TC. Negative factors that affect the overall experience can include a lack of compassion from healthcare professionals, as well as physical side effects after surgery and during recovery. Isolation and loneliness can be significant at many stages, most frequently during treatment with radioactive iodine. Anxiety and fear were widespread among participants.

The experiences of TC patients can be challenging, with well-being influenced by treatment effects, psychological distress and the quality of support available. These findings suggest that enhanced patient education, emotional support and follow-up care may help improve well-being, although further research is needed to explore how best to implement such approaches.

First post-contrAst SubtracTed (FAST) MRI, an abbreviated breast MRI scan, has high sensitivity for sub-centimetre aggressive breast cancer and short acquisition and interpretation times. These attributes promise effective supplemental screening. Until now, FAST MRI research has focused on women above population-risk of breast cancer (high mammographic density or personal history). DYAMOND aims to define the population within the population-risk NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) likely to benefit from FAST MRI. The study population is the 40% of screening clients aged 50–52 who have average mammographic density (BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) B) on their first screening mammogram. DYAMOND will answer whether sufficient numbers of breast cancers, missed by mammography, can be detected by FAST MRI to justify the inclusion of this group in a future randomised controlled trial.

Prospective, multicentre, diagnostic yield, single-arm study with an embedded qualitative sub-study: all recruited participants undergo a FAST MRI. An internal pilot will assess the willingness of sites and screening clients to participate in the study. Screening clients aged 50–52, with a clear first NHSBSP mammogram and BI-RADS B mammographic density (by automated measurement) will be invited to participate (recruitment target: 1000). The primary outcome is the number of additional cancers detected by FAST MRI (missed by screening mammography). A Fleming’s two-stage design will be used as this allows for early stopping after stage 1, to save participants, funding costs and time continuing to the end of the study if the question can be answered earlier.

The NHSBSP Research and Innovation Development Advisory Committee and the Yorkshire and Humber–Sheffield Research Ethics Committee (23/YH/0268, study ID (IRAS): 330059) approved this research protocol. Participation involves a two-stage informed consent process, enabling screening for eligibility through automated mammographic density measurement. Patients with breast cancer helped shape the study design and co-produced participant-facing documents. They will disseminate the results to the public in a clear and meaningful way. Results will be published with open access in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

ISRCTN74193022