Palliative care supports the physical, emotional, social and spiritual needs of people with serious life-limiting illness. Future research must align with the priorities of people approaching the end of their lives, and those close to them.

To undertake a refresh of the James Lind Alliance Palliative and End of Life Care Priority Setting Partnership, to identify and prioritise areas for future research.

The James Lind Alliance process was applied, between May 2023 and February 2025. An initial online survey collected areas for future research from participants. These were synthesised into a long list of questions and shortlisted through a second online survey. Final ranking of priorities was achieved using an adapted Nominal Group Technique within a prioritisation workshop.

People living with serious life-limiting illnesses, carers, friends and family members supporting them, bereaved people, health and social care professionals, volunteers working in palliative and end-of-life care and members of the public.

1032 and 626 responses were received to survey 1 and 2, respectively. 20 people with lived and professional experience attended the prioritisation workshop. An updated list of 24 priorities for palliative and end-of-life care research was produced.

The priorities reflect the range of issues shaping end-of-life experiences and serve as a call to action for researchers and funders.

To investigate associations between shift work patterns and sleep disturbance, and to assess if the association is modified by demographic factors, socioeconomic factors, anthropometric and lifestyle factors, health conditions or sleep traits.

Analysis of cross-sectional data obtained from the UK Biobank baseline assessment.

UK Biobank, a large-scale prospective cohort study which recruited half a million participants aged 40–69 years between 2006 and 2010 from across the UK.

A total of 285 175 employed or self-employed participants at baseline (2006–2010), including 148 296 (52.0%) females and 136 879 (48.0%) males. The sample comprised 94.0% White, 0.7% Mixed race, 0.36% East Asian, 2.0% South Asian, 1.8% Black and 0.89% from other ethnic backgrounds.

Sleep disturbance was defined as the presence of both insomnia and excessive sleepiness symptoms.

A total of 42 181 (14.8%) participants had sleep disturbance defined based on insomnia and excessive sleepiness. 236 200 (82.8%) were non-shift workers, while 48 975 (17.2%) were shift workers, which included 24 062 (49.1%) working day shifts only, 17 940 (36.6%) working night shifts sometimes or usually, and 6973 (14.2%) working night shifts always. Compared with non-shift workers, all shift workers had higher multivariable-adjusted odds of sleep disturbance: (non-night shifts: OR in model 3 (OR) 1.21 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.27); sometimes/usually night shifts: OR 1.37 (95% CI 1.30 to 1.44) and always night shifts: OR 1.50 (95% CI 1.38 to 1.63)). The association between shift work pattern and sleep disturbance was modified by age (p_interactioninteraction=0.0005) and smoking status (p_interaction=0.04).

Shift work is associated with a higher odds of sleep disturbance compared with non-shift work in all participants, with greatest odds observed among those always working night shifts. The association was stronger among individuals who were younger than 55 years old, from an ethnic minority background and never smokers. Future large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to further investigate these associations.

Sexual violence (SV) remains a critical issue affecting mental health globally, defined as coerced sexual acts, unwanted advances or trafficking. Research indicates that an estimated 81% of women and 48% of men in Belgium have experienced SV in their lifetime.1 Actual rates might be higher among older adults due to under-reporting.2 While extensive research focuses on younger victims, there is growing...

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of delivering a vocational rehabilitation intervention (Return to Work After Trauma—ROWTATE), remotely to individuals recovering from traumatic injuries. The primary objectives were to assess therapists’ training and competence, adapt the intervention and training for remote delivery and assess the feasibility and fidelity of remote delivery to inform a definitive randomised controlled trial.

A mixed-methods feasibility study incorporating (1) telerehabilitation qualitative literature review, (2) qualitative interviews preintervention and postintervention with therapists and patients, (3) a team objective structured clinical examination to assess competency, (4) usefulness of training, attitudes towards (15-item Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale) and confidence in (4-item Evidence Based Practice Confidence Scale) evidence-based practice, intervention delivery confidence (8-bespoke questions) and intervention behaviour determinants (51-items Theoretical Domains Framework) and (5) single-arm intervention delivery feasibility study.

The study was conducted in two UK Major Trauma Centres. The intervention and training were adapted for remote delivery due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Therapists: Seven occupational therapists (OTs) and clinical psychologists (CPs) were trained, and six participated in competency assessment. Seven OTs and CPs participated in preintervention interviews and surveys; six completed post-intervention interviews and four completed post-training surveys. Patients: 10 patients were enrolled in the single-arm feasibility study and 4 of these participated in postintervention qualitative interviews. Inclusion criteria included therapists involved in vocational rehabilitation delivery and patients admitted to major trauma centres. Exclusion criteria included participation in other vocational rehabilitation trials or those who had returned to work or education for at least 80% of preinjury hours. Intervention: The ROWTATE vocational rehabilitation intervention was delivered remotely by trained OTs and CPs. Training included competency assessments, mentoring and adaptation for telerehabilitation. The intervention was delivered over multiple sessions, with content tailored to individual patient needs.

Therapists found the training useful, reported positive attitudes (Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale mean=2.9 (SD 0.9)) and high levels of confidence in delivering evidence-based practice (range 75%–100%) and the ROWTATE intervention (range 80%–100%). Intervention barriers identified pretraining became facilitators post-training. Half the therapists needed additional support post-training through mentoring or additional training. The intervention and training were successfully adapted for remote delivery. High levels of fidelity (intervention components delivered: OTs=84.5%, CPs=92.9%) and session attendance rates were found (median: OT=97%, CP=100%). Virtually all sessions were delivered remotely (OT=98%, CP=100%). The intervention was acceptable to patients and therapists; both considered face-to-face delivery where necessary was important.

The ROWTATE intervention was delivered remotely with high fidelity and attendance and was acceptable to patients and therapists. Definitive trial key changes include modifying therapist training, competency assessment, face-to-face intervention delivery where necessary and addressing lower fidelity intervention components.

ISRCTN74668529.

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) helps pregnant women quit smoking. Usual National Health Service (NHS) cessation care in pregnancy starts only after women stop smoking and comprises behavioural support and NRT. NRT is stopped if women restart smoking. We hypothesised that NRT would have a bigger effect on cessation in pregnancy if used: (1) to reduce smoking before quitting (‘preloading’), (2) during brief smoking lapses after quitting and (3) to help those who cannot stop smoking, to reduce instead.

A two-arm parallel group, open-label, multicentre, assessor-blind randomised controlled trial. Participants are recruited at hospital antenatal clinics and other NHS settings throughout England and Wales or via social media advertising. Those enrolled are in antenatal care,

Ethics approval was granted by the West Midlands—Coventry & Warwickshire Research Ethics Committee (REC reference: 21/WM/0172; Protocol number 21001; IRAS Project ID: 291236). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated to the public, funders, relevant practice and policy representatives and other researchers.

ISRCTN84798566.

Within the Canadian context, we sought to examine the relationship between households with autistic children/youths and household income.

We used data from the 2019 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth (CHSCY) to analyse households with a child/youth aged 1–17. Propensity-score matching was used to pair records for children/youths with a reported autism diagnosis to those without. We used linear regression for continuous outcomes (eg, total household income) and Poisson regression for binary outcomes (eg, low household income). All analyses were adjusted for the correlation between matched pairs.

Total annual income of all household members.

Low household income; single-parent or single-income status; and whether at least one parent was not working or absent from work during the past week.

Among a total of 39 951 CHSCY records, we identified a cohort of 815 autistic children/youths. The characteristics of the matched cohort were well-balanced. Households with an autistic child/youth had a mean annual household income that was lower (mean difference: $C16 489; 95% CI $C6384 to $C27 149) compared with matched households without an autistic child/youth. Households with an autistic child/youth were also 26% more likely to be classified as having a low household income (Relative risk (RR)1.26; 95% CI1.17 to 1.35) and 20% more likely to rely on a single income (RR1.20; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.33) compared with households without an autistic child/youth.

Compared with households without an autistic child/youth, those with an autistic child/youth often face more economic challenges, including lower household income and greater risk of food insecurity. Households with an autistic child/youth are more likely to rely on a single income.

The ROWTATE intervention helps people experiencing trauma to return to work (RTW) through vocational rehabilitation (VR) support from occupational therapists (OTs) and clinical psychologists (CPs). This study aims to explore and understand the acceptability of VR after traumatic injury for patients, therapists and employers.

Qualitative interviews in eight major trauma regions, UK.

Interviews were undertaken with a range of stakeholders—15 patients, 15 therapists and 6 employers. Data were analysed using the theoretical framework of acceptability.

Stakeholders understood the aim of the intervention was to support people to RTW and perceived it as effective in achieving this. Patients and therapists understood the benefits of working with a combination of occupational therapy and clinical psychology. The intervention fits with the values of patients wanting to recover, therapists wanting to offer support and line managers wanting to meet employer and employee needs.

Patients reported they could not have achieved RTW without the intervention, and their therapist helped them feel less alone. Therapists felt that their work was rewarding, effective and had good outcomes. Patients perceived remote delivery as less burdensome than attending in person. Therapists felt they wasted time on non-patient activity, such as (re-)arranging appointments.

Employers discussed the difficulty of balancing employer and employee needs and managing uncertainty. Some workplace policies lacked flexibility, and without the ROWTATE intervention, employers lacked confidence in supporting employees RTW.

A VR intervention delivered remotely by OTs and CPs is acceptable to patients, therapists and employers.

ISRCTN43115471.

Lower gastrointestinal symptoms attributed to colorectal disease are common. Early diagnosis of serious colorectal disease such as colorectal cancer (CRC), precancerous growths (polyps) and inflammation is important to ensure the best possible outcomes for a patient. The current ‘gold standard’ diagnostic test is colonoscopy. Colonoscopy is an invasive procedure. Some people struggle to cope with it and require intravenous sedation and/or analgesia. It is also resource-intensive, needing to be performed in specialist endoscopy units by a trained team. Across the UK, the demand for colonoscopy is outstripping capacity and the diagnosis of colorectal disease is being delayed. A colon capsule endoscope (CCE) is an alternative colorectal diagnostic. It is a ‘camera in a pill’ that can be swallowed and which passes through the gastrointestinal tract, obtaining visual images on the colon. There is now established experience of CCE in the UK. CCE might provide a less invasive method to diagnose colorectal disease if found to be accurate and effective and provide a means by which to increase the National Health Service (NHS) diagnostic capacity.

The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CCE when compared with colonoscopy in representative and clinically meaningful cohorts of patients. An evaluation of the experiences of CCE for the patient and clinical team and an assessment of cost effectiveness will be undertaken.

We will undertake three research workstreams (WS). In WS1, we shall perform a paired (back-to-back) study. Each participant will swallow the CCE and then later on the same day they will have a colonoscopy. The study has been designed in collaboration with our Patient Advisory Group and as closely mirrors standard care as is possible. 973 participants will be recruited from three representative clinical contexts; suspected CRC, suspected inflammatory bowel disease and postpolypectomy surveillance. Up to 30 sites across the UK will be involved to maximise inclusivity. Measures of diagnostic accuracy will be reported along with CCE completion rates, number of colonoscopy procedures potentially prevented and adverse events, such as capsule retention. A nested substudy of intraobserver and interobserver agreement will be performed. WS2 will develop models of cost-effectiveness and WS3 will evaluate the patient and clinician experience, with reference to acceptability and choice.

The study findings will provide the evidence base to inform future colorectal diagnostic services.

The study has approval from the North East—Tyne and Wear South research ethics committee (REC reference 24/NE/0178, IRAS 331349). The findings will be disseminated to the NHS, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, other clinical stakeholders and participants, patients and the public.

ISRCTN16126290.

Radiological imaging is a central facet of the multidisciplinary evaluation of suspected child physical abuse. Current guidelines for the imaging of suspected child physical abuse are often unclear, incomplete and highly variable regarding recommendations on critical questions, thereby risking clinical heterogeneity, unstructured decision-making and missed diagnoses. We, therefore, aim to develop and report an evidence-based and consensus-derived international guideline for the radiological investigation of index and contact children in the context of suspected physical abuse and to ascertain areas of scientific uncertainty to inform future research priorities.

The international guidelines for the imaging investigation of suspected child physical abuse (IGISPA) consensus group includes formal representation from 127 recognised experts across 14 subspecialties, six continents and 32 national and/or international organisations. Participants will be divided into five longitudinal subgroups (indications for imaging, skeletal imaging, visceral imaging, neuroimaging and postmortem imaging) with three cross-cutting themes (radiography, genetics and adaptations for low- and lower-middle-income countries). Each subgroup will develop preliminary consensus statements via integration of current evidence-based guidelines, systematic literature review and the clinical expertise of a multinational group of experts. Statements will then undergo anonymised voting in a modified e-Delphi process and iterative revision until consensus (≥80% agreement) is achieved. Final statements will undergo both internal and external peer review prior to endorsement.

As an anonymous survey of consenting healthcare professionals, this study did not require ethical approval. Experts provided written informed consent to participate prior to commencement of the modified Delphi process. The IGISPA consensus statement and any subsequent guidance will be published open access in peer-reviewed medical journals.

Acute low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent condition with various non-surgical treatment options, yet no comprehensive network meta-analysis has systematically compared their relative efficacy for pain and disability. This study aims to fill that gap by synthesising available evidence on the efficacy of different types of non-surgical interventions for acute LBP, such as various medications, manual therapies and education-based therapies. Our coprimary objectives are to (1) compare each active treatment to an inert reference for measures of LBP and related disability and (2) rank the efficacy of treatments.

We will conduct a systematic search across multiple databases, including grey literature, to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating non-surgical treatments for acute LBP. Eligible studies must report on pain and/or disability outcomes in adults. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of evidence will be graded using CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We will use a frequentist network meta-analysis to pool standardised mean differences in pain and disability, employing random-effects models to account for heterogeneity. A qualitative analysis will assess study characteristics and transitivity, while a quantitative analysis will evaluate efficacy and inconsistency. Results will be presented using network geometry, p-scores, forest plots, funnel plots, Egger’s test, Q-statistics and league tables to visualise both direct and indirect evidence and to identify potential biases.

This review protocol does not involve any primary research with human participants, animal subjects or medical record review. Consequently, this work did not require approval from an institutional review board or ethics committee. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conference(s). De-identified data will be made available in a public repository.