Health literacy (HL) is essential for making informed health-related decisions, for example enabling parents to reduce their child’s allergy risk. Health literacy does not, however, rely solely on an individual’s capacities, but is strongly influenced by external factors. Midwives provide important health advice to families, particularly since their relationship is close during a time of significant transition. This offers them a unique opportunity to positively influence the HL of parents, which in turn may support the health and well-being of the whole family. The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate an intervention that can support midwives in providing allergy prevention advice in a way that is in line with the concept of HL.

In accordance with the recommendations of the Medical Research Council framework in the first phase of this study, we will survey midwives (target sample size=379) in Germany regarding their practices, the potential barriers they face and enabling factors in providing advice on early childhood allergy prevention in an HL-responsive way. The data will be subjected to descriptive statistical analysis. Two co-design workshops will then be conducted with various stakeholders in two regions (Rhineland-Palatinate and Saxony) of Germany. Following the protocol proposed by the Stanford Design Thinking School, we will use design thinking to collect ideas for the intervention. Based on these ideas and our previous qualitative and quantitative study, we will develop an intervention in collaboration with didactic experts. The intervention will be piloted in three groups (midwives=10–15, midwives working as practice supervisors=5–10, students of midwifery=10–20). For the process evaluation, we will use observation protocols of the intervention conduct and qualitative interviews. For the outcome evaluation, we will use a questionnaire and observations in simulation laboratories with students of midwifery.

This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Regensburg (ID 23-3441-101) and is in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Participation in the study will only be possible after informed consent has been given. Our results will be presented at national and international conferences and published in scientific journals. Additionally, once it has been finalised, we will make the intervention available to educational institutions for (future) midwives.

Dysphagia, or difficulty in swallowing, significantly impacts the quality of life of the affected individuals. Diagnostic approaches, including video fluoroscopic swallowing studies and flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, are the most commonly used methods for assessing swallowing function. Recent advancements have led to the development of artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), which will provide innovative approaches to dysphagia diagnosis and treatment planning. There is a limited synthesis of literature on AI tools in dysphagia. There is an urgent need for a more rigorous and structured scoping review that can address the existing gaps, provide a more comprehensive evidence synthesis, and establish clearer guidelines for the clinical implementation of AI in assessments and management of dysphagia. This review will include studies focusing on AI tools such as ML, DL and computer vision for assessing and managing dysphagia. The context will be clinical or therapeutic settings, and all language articles will be considered for the review. Studies not involving AI technologies, those without clinical outcomes and ethical approval, and those focusing solely on the paediatric population will be excluded. This scoping review will systematically map and synthesise the existing literature on the use of AI tools for the assessment and management of dysphagia.

This scoping review will follow JBI methodology and PRISMA ScR guidelines. Information to be searched from January 2000 to May 2025 will include MEDLINE (via Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL (via EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, JBI Evidence Synthesis, ProQuest and Google Scholar. The titles, abstracts and full texts will be screened by two independent reviewers. Data extraction will use a study-specific customised form, with descriptive analysis employed to categorise studies by AI tools and outcomes.

Ethical approval is not mandatory for this scoping review as it does not entail the collection of any individual patient data. Secondary data from publicly accessible research papers will be used. All the data sources will be appropriately cited. The findings will be propagated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific presentations.

Open Science Framework: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/DYCE9.

To estimate condition-specific patient travel distances and associated carbon emissions across common chronic diseases in routine National Health Service (NHS) care, and to assess the potential carbon savings of modal shifts in transportation.

Retrospective population-based cohort study.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Scotland.

6599 patients aged 50–55 years at diagnosis, including cardiovascular disease (n=1711), epilepsy (n=1044), cancer (n=716), rheumatoid arthritis (RA; n=172) and a matched control group based on age, sex and area-level deprivation (n=2956).

Annual home-to-clinic distances and associated carbon emissions modelled under four transport modes (petrol car, electric car, bus, train) across five time points: 2-year prediagnosis, diagnosis year and 2-year postdiagnosis.

Mean annual travel distances to hospital varied by condition and peaked at diagnosis. Patients with cancer had the highest travel distances (161 km/patient/year for men; 139 km/patient/year for women), followed by RA (approximately 78 km/patient/year). The matched control group travelled 2/patient/year to 8.0 kg CO₂/patient/year. Bus travel resulted in intermediate emissions, estimated between 10.5 and 8.0 kg CO₂/patient. When travel was modelled using electric vehicles, emissions dropped between 3.5 and 2.7 kg for all conditions. Train travel produced similarly low emissions. Reducing petrol car travel from 100% to 60% lowered emissions up to 6.6 kg CO₂/patient.

Condition-specific estimates of healthcare-related travel emissions provide baseline understanding of the opportunities and challenges for decarbonising healthcare. Emission reduction is most achievable through modal shift, yet such shifts depend on factors beyond NHS control—such as transport infrastructure, digital access and social equity. Multisectoral strategies, including targeted telemedicine and integrated transport and urban planning, are critical to achieving net-zero healthcare while maintaining equitable access to care.

To conduct a synthesis of existing empirical and grey literature to identify the contexts and mechanisms that enable the adoption, offer, uptake and return of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) in the primary care pathway in England, UK, for patients with signs or symptoms of suspected colorectal cancer (CRC). From this, develop a theory about how specific programme activities lead to certain outcomes.

A realist synthesis.

Medline (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier) and grey literature sources until end of July 2023.

The purpose of the work was to determine how different factors interact within a health system to optimise the approach to implementing and using symptomatic FIT (sFIT) in clinical practice for patient benefit. The criteria used to bound the scope of the synthesis included date (published between 2017 and July 2023), exposure of interest (sFIT in the primary care pathway for patients with signs or symptoms of suspected CRC), geographic location of study (countries that make up the UK), language (English) and participants (adults). Any study design and type of publication was considered.

Given the recognised lack of literature on the implementation of sFIT, it was crucial to include insights from grey literature. To do this, key national groups and organisations—involved or related to this subject—were methodically identified and appropriate papers and reports identified.

A thematic approach was used to identify relevant data in included records and allow realist insights to be obtained. Inductive and deductive coding enabled detection of key data. Arguments were generated and developed into context–mechanism–outcome configurations (CMOCs). Iteratively, an initial list of 38 CMOCs was refined to 14 themes and 19 CMOCs. These were then structured to create a multifaceted, multilevel realist synthesis programme theory.

Systematic searching led to the full appraisal of 99 records to determine suitability of each to confirm, refute or help develop theory. Studies were assessed for rigour and relevance to inform selection. The process resulted in 45 records being chosen for inclusion, of which 28 were from database searches and 17 from grey literature sources.

The key contexts and mechanisms that help optimise adoption, offer, uptake and return of sFIT have been elucidated (although partially). These can be broadly summarised into the 10 ‘Cs’: creating a compelling Case and Conditions for change, reaching Consensus through Collaborative working, fostering a Culture that values Clinical judgement, building Confidence by developing Capabilities and, finally, ensuring Clarity and Coherence of both practical processes and safety netting procedures.

Fundamentally, optimising the adoption, offer, uptake and return of sFIT in primary care for patients with signs or symptoms of suspected CRC is predicated on developing the acceptability of this initiative to every stakeholder at every level within a health system.

Tuberculosis (TB) is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Emerging evidence in high-burden settings suggests significant long-term sequelae among people surviving TB; however, evidence from high-income, low-TB burden settings like Canada is lacking. In a person with TB infection, provision of TB preventive treatment (TPT) can prevent TB disease and its sequelae, but remains underused. We propose the Functional Outcomes, Lung health and Livelihood Outcomes among people With Tuberculosis study, a multicentre, prospective cohort study in Canada to help improve our understanding of the impacts of TPT and TB disease on individuals.

This is a prospective cohort study taking place in Montreal and Vancouver, Canada. We aim to recruit and retain at least 120 people with microbiologically confirmed TB disease, 340 people treated for TB infection and 120 without TB disease or infection who will be considered our unexposed group. All participants must be ≥6 years of age. Participants with TB disease or infection will be recruited within 2 weeks of treatment initiation. We will follow-up unexposed participants and participants with TB disease for 24 months, and participants with TB infection for 12 months. Throughout follow-up, participants will complete assessments measuring lung health and function, quality of life, disability, dyspnoea, psychological distress, as well as changes in employment and direct and indirect costs incurred because of treatment. Among participants with TB disease, our primary outcome is the difference in quality-adjusted life years between participants with TB disease and those unexposed at 24 months. For participants with TB infection, our primary outcome is the identification of non-patient characteristics (eg, patient cost, quality of life) associated with participant decision to discontinue treatment. Patient partners have contributed to the design of the study and will be involved with the study through to its dissemination.

This study has been approved by institutional ethics review boards at The Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre (2025–10344) and The University of British Columbia (H24-02071). All participants will provide informed consent (and assent, if required) prior to participating in the study. We will disseminate study results to participants, national and international organisations, and through open-access peer-reviewed academic journals and conferences.

Targeted biologic therapies have transformed outcomes for individuals with psoriasis, a common immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease. The widespread use of these highly effective treatments has led to a growing number of individuals with clear or nearly clear skin remaining on continuous, long-term treatment. Personalised strategies to minimise drug exposure may sustain long-term disease control while reducing treatment burden, associated risks and healthcare costs. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a definitive pragmatic effectiveness trial of two personalised dose minimisation strategies compared with continuous treatment (standard care) in adults with well-controlled psoriasis receiving the exemplar biologic risankizumab.

This is a multicentre, assessor-blind, parallel group, open-label randomised controlled feasibility trial in the UK, evaluating two personalised biologic dose minimisation strategies for psoriasis. 90 adults with both physician-assessed and patient-assessed clear or nearly clear skin on risankizumab monotherapy for ≥12 months will be randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to (1) patient-led ‘as-needed’ treatment, where risankizumab is administered at the first sign of self-assessed psoriasis recurrence, (2) therapeutic drug monitoring-guided treatment, with personalised dosing intervals determined using a pharmacokinetic model or (3) continuous treatment as per standard care, for 12 months. Participants will be invited to submit self-reported outcomes and self-taken photographs every 3 months using a bespoke remote monitoring system (mySkin app) and will attend an in-person assessment at 12 months. They may also request additional patient-initiated follow-up appointments during the trial if needed. The primary outcome is the practicality and acceptability of the two personalised biologic dose minimisation strategies, assessed as a composite measure including recruitment and retention rates, adherence to the assigned strategies and acceptability to both patients and clinicians. The feasibility of collecting healthcare cost and resource utilisation data will also be evaluated to inform a future cost-effectiveness analysis. A nested qualitative study, involving semistructured interviews with patients and clinicians, will explore perspectives on the personalised biologic dose minimisation strategies. These findings will inform the design of a future definitive trial.

This study received ethical approval from the Seasonal Research Ethics Committee (reference 24/LO/0089). Results will be disseminated through scientific conferences, peer-reviewed publications and patient/public engagement events. Lay summaries and infographics will be codeveloped with patient partners to ensure the findings are accessible for the wider public.

ISRCTN17922845.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is among the most common psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents. While previous meta-analyses have synthesised evidence on the efficacy and acceptability of newer-generation antidepressants in this population, specific adverse events (AEs) remain poorly characterised. This is of high clinical importance, as AEs are burdensome for patients, can reduce treatment adherence and lead to discontinuation. Here, we present a protocol for a network meta-analysis designed to evaluate the specific AE profile and comparative tolerability of newer-generation antidepressants in children and adolescents with MDD.

The planned study will include double-blind randomised controlled trials that compared one active drug with another and/or placebo for the acute treatment of MDD in children and adolescents. The following antidepressants will be considered: agomelatine, alaproclate, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, edivoxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The primary outcomes will include the number of patients experiencing at least one AE, specific non-serious AEs, serious AEs (eg, suicidal ideation) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. Published and unpublished studies will be retrieved through a systematic search in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo and regulatory agencies’ registries. Study selection and data extraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. For each outcome, a network meta-analysis will be performed to synthesise all evidence. Consistency will be assessed through local and global methods, and the confidence in the evidence will be evaluated using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis web application. All analyses will be conducted in the R software.

The planned review does not require ethical approval. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and may be presented at international conferences.

CRD420251011399.

Most oral cancers in India present in advanced stages and tend to have poor oncological outcomes. Chemotherapy has been associated with improved oncological outcomes in various cancers, but its role in oral cancer is still not well-defined in curative settings beyond radiosensitisation. Despite an excellent response rate, neoadjuvant chemotherapy trials have failed to show an oncological advantage. Earlier studies were limited by their heterogeneous patient population, including all head and neck subsites, and included both inoperable cancer and early-stage operable cases. Due to such patient selection, the intended results were never met. Patients with biologically aggressive diseases (advanced nodal disease) may derive greater benefit from induction chemotherapy (ICT). Therefore, we aim to determine the oncological advantage of adding ICT to oral squamous cell cancer with advanced nodal disease (N2–N3).

The study is an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial, with an allocation ratio of 1:1, being conducted at seven leading cancer centres in India. The primary objective is to compare survival outcomes with and without ICT before surgery in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and advanced nodal disease, specifically focusing on 2-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary objectives include assessing overall survival (OS), clinical and pathological response rates, treatment compliance, treatment completion rates, adverse events, treatment-related toxicity (using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, V.5.0), quality of life (measured with Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck) and postoperative complications (using the modified Clavien-Dindo classification).

The study population consists of patients with operable OSCC and advanced nodal disease (N2–N3), adequate organ function, aged 18–65 years and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0–2. The treatment arms are the standard arm Surgery arm (SURG), which involves surgery followed by adjuvant radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy, and the experimental arm (ICT), in which patients will receive two cycles of ICT using either cisplatin, docetaxel and 5-fluorouracil or cisplatin, docetaxel and capecitabine, followed by surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy. The sample size was calculated to detect an HR of 0.67 with 80% power. A total of 184 events are required, and with an accrual rate of 15 patients per month, 300 patients will be recruited. DFS analysis will occur 32 months after the trial begins, and follow-up will continue for 5 years. OS analysis will be conducted when 184 deaths are observed. Taking 10% of the withdrawal of consent, a total of 346 patients need to be included.

This trial aims to establish the potential superiority of ICT or definitively determine its futility in OSCC with advanced nodal disease. A positive outcome could provide practice-changing data, particularly for Indian patients, whereas negative results could halt the use of ICT in this setting, directing research efforts towards more effective treatment strategies.

CTRI/2024/03/064586; NCT06737822; Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) number: AIIMS/IEC/2023/4622 (lead site).

Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a broad range of diseases associated with abnormalities/degeneration of retinal cells. We aimed to identify the top 10 Australian research priorities for IRDs to ultimately facilitate more meaningful and potentially cost-effective research.

We conducted a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership that involved two Australian-wide surveys and online workshops.

Australia-wide.

Individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible to participate if they had an IRD, were caregivers of an individual with an IRD or were health professionals providing care to this community.

In Survey 1, we gathered participants’ unanswered questions about IRDs. We grouped these into summary questions and undertook a literature review to verify if they were truly unanswered (ie, evidence uncertainties). In Survey 2, participants voted for the uncertainties that they considered a priority. Top-ranked uncertainties progressed for discussion and final prioritisation in two workshops.

In Survey 1, we collected 223 questions from 69 participants. We grouped these into 42 summary questions and confirmed 41 as evidence uncertainties. In Survey 2, 151 participants voted, with the 16 uncertainties progressing to final prioritisation. The top 10 priorities, set by the 24 workshop participants, represented (1) treatment/cure; (2) symptoms and disease progression; (3) psychosocial well-being and (4) health service delivery. The #1 priority was for treatment to prevent, slow down or stop vision loss, followed by the #2 priority to address the psychological impact of having an IRD.

The top 10 research priorities highlight the need for IRD research that takes a whole-person, systems approach. Collaborations to progress priorities will accelerate the translation of research into real-world benefits.

The number of people living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs or ‘multimorbidity’) is growing. Evidence indicates that exercise-based rehabilitation can improve health-related quality of life and reduce hospital admissions for a number of single long-term conditions. However, it is increasingly recognised that such condition-focused rehabilitation programmes do not meet the needs of people living with MLTCs. The aims for this study were to (1) evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of the newly developed Personalised Exercise Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) intervention; (2) assess the feasibility of study methods to inform progression to a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) and (3) refine our intervention programme theory.

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with patients receiving and healthcare practitioners delivering the PERFORM intervention, to seek their experiences of the intervention and taking part in the study. Interviews were analysed thematically, informed by Normalisation Process Theory and the programme theory.

Three UK sites (two acute hospital settings, one community-based healthcare setting).

18 of the 60 PERFORM participants and 6 healthcare professionals were interviewed.

The intervention consisted of 8 weeks of supervised group-based exercise rehabilitation and structured self-care symptom-based support.

All participants and staff interviewed found PERFORM useful for physical and mental well-being and noted positive impacts of participation, although some specific modifications to the intervention delivery and training and study methods were identified. Scheduling, staffing and space limitations were barriers that must be considered for future evaluation and implementation. Key intervention mechanisms identified were social support, patient education, building routines and habits, as well as support from healthcare professionals.

We found the PERFORM intervention to be acceptable and feasible, with the potential to improve the health and well-being of people with MLTCs. The findings of the process evaluation inform the future delivery of the PERFORM intervention and the design of our planned full RCT. A definitive trial is needed to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness.

ISRCTN68786622.

Existing exercise-based rehabilitation services, such as cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation, are traditionally commissioned around single long-term conditions (LTCs) and therefore may not meet the complex needs of adults with multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) or multimorbidity. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the newly developed personalised exercise-rehabilitation programme for people with multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) and the trial methods.

A parallel two-group mixed-methods feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) with embedded process and economic evaluation.

Three UK sites (two acute hospital settings, one community-based healthcare setting).

60 adults with MLTCs (defined as the presence of ≥2 LTCs) with at least one known to benefit from exercise therapy were randomised 2:1 to PERFORM intervention plus usual care (PERFORM group) or usual care alone (control group).

The intervention consisted of 8 weeks of supervised group-based exercise rehabilitation and structured self-care symptom-based support.

Primary feasibility outcomes included: trial recruitment (percentage of a target of 60 participants recruited within 4.5 months), retention (percentage of participants with complete EuroQol data at 3 months) and intervention adherence (percentage of intervention group attending ≥60% sessions). Other feasibility measures included completion of outcome measures at baseline (pre-randomisation), 3 months post-randomisation (including patient-reported outcomes, exercise capacity and collection of health and social care resource use) and intervention fidelity.

Target recruitment (40 PERFORM group, 20 control group) was met within the timeframe. Participants were 57% women with a mean (SD) age of 62 (13) years, body mass index of 30.8 (8.0) kg/m² and a median of 4 LTCs (most common: diabetes (41.7%), hypertension (38.3%), asthma (36.7%) and a painful condition (35.0%)). We achieved EuroQol outcome retention of 76.7% (95% CI: 65.9% to 87.1%; 46/60 participants) and intervention adherence of 72.5% (95% CI: 56.3% to 84.4%; 29/40 participants). Data completion for attendees was over 90% for 11/18 outcome measures.

Our findings support the feasibility and rationale for delivering the PERFORM comprehensive self-management and exercise-based rehabilitation intervention for people living with MLTCs and progression to a full multicentre RCT to formally assess clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

ISRCTN68786622.

Prescribing patterns for hyperopia in children vary widely among eye care providers worldwide. This scoping review aims to identify and map the current literature on optical correction and catalogue outcomes reported, particularly in the domains of vision, vision-related functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in school-aged children with hyperopia.

This protocol was developed in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute’s Manual for Evidence Synthesis. We will include studies involving school-aged children with hyperopia without restrictions on sex, gender, race, ethnicity, type of optical correction, length of intervention, publication date or country of origin. We will include studies with internal or external comparison groups. We will exclude studies associated with myopia control treatments, ocular and visual pathway pathologies affecting vision or visual function. We will search Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase.com and PubMed. Examples of data to be extracted include population demographics, visual acuity, study-specific definitions for refractive error, treatment regimens for optical correction, vision and vision-related functional outcomes and QoL (general or vision-related) as quantified by validated instruments.

Informed consent and Institutional Review Board approval will not be required, as this scoping review will only use published data. The results from the scoping review will be disseminated by publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and at professional conferences.

Cleft lip and palate significantly impact a child’s speech and facial appearance. Children undergo cleft repairs in infancy, but poor results from these initial repairs often lead to secondary surgery. In the late 1990s, cleft care provision in the UK was centralised to approximately 11 managed clinical networks or centres. This centralisation has been associated with improvements in speech and aesthetic outcomes, but little is known about the effect of centralisation on the use of secondary surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the cumulative incidence of secondary cleft surgeries before and after centralisation and the proportion of children achieving good clinical outcomes without secondary surgery.

Retrospective, cross-sectional.

Two cross-sectional studies of 5-year-old children with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate were conducted, one precentralisation and one postcentralisation.

The cumulative incidence of secondary surgery from birth through age 5 was compared precentralisation and postcentralisation using Fisher’s exact test, as were facial appearance and speech outcomes at age 5. Risk ratios (RR) were estimated using log-binomial multivariable regression models that adjusted for sex and age at evaluation.

Postcentralisation, the proportion of children achieving good or excellent facial appearance increased from 16% to 42% (p

Centralisation of cleft care was associated with improved outcomes of primary lip and palate repairs and a corresponding reduction in secondary surgery.

Sepsis is a major cause of death both globally and in the United States. Early identification and treatment of sepsis are crucial for improving patient outcomes. International guidelines recommend hospital sepsis screening programmes, which are commonly implemented in the electronic health record (EHR) as an interruptive sepsis screening alert based on systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Despite widespread use, it is unknown whether these sepsis screening and alert tools improve the delivery of high-quality sepsis care.

The Sepsis Electronic Prompting for Timely Intervention and Care (SEPTIC) master protocol will study two distinct populations in separate trials: emergency department (ED) patients (SEPTIC-ED) and inpatients (SEPTIC-IP). The SEPTIC trials are pragmatic, multicentre, blinded, randomised controlled trials, with equal allocation to compare four SIRS-based sepsis screening alert groups: no alerts (control), nurse alerts only, prescribing clinician alerts only, or nurse and prescribing clinician alerts. Randomisation will be at the patient level. SEPTIC will be performed at eight acute-care hospitals in the greater New York City area and enrol patients at least 18 years old. The primary outcome is the percentage of patients with completion of a modified Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) hour-1 bundle within 3 hours of the first SIRS alert. Secondary outcomes include time from first alert to completion of a modified SSC hour-1 bundle, time from first alert to individual bundle component order and completion, intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, hospital discharge disposition, inpatient mortality at 90 days, positive blood cultures (bacteraemia), adverse antibiotic events, sepsis diagnoses and septic shock diagnoses.

Ethics approval was obtained from the Columbia University Institutional Review Board (IRB) serving as a single IRB. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journal(s), scientific meeting(s) and via social media.

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06117605 and NCT06117618.

Cohort studies of ageing and cognitive decline typically do not begin fielding comprehensive cognitive assessments until older adulthood. However, for identifying preventable dementia risk factors, there is strong value in beginning at earlier ages. The case is especially compelling in sub-Saharan Africa, where the number of older individuals is expected to triple in the next three decades, and where risk factors may operate more intensively at earlier ages. This study reports on the adaptation and validity of the Harmonised Cognitive Assessment Protocol (HCAP) approach in the Kenya Life Panel Survey (KLPS), collected among middle-aged respondents.

To evaluate the validity of the HCAP approach in Kenya, this study assesses model fit statistics from confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) and tests measurement invariance by respondent characteristics.

Both rural and urban areas in Kenya.

A sample of n=5878 individuals from the KLPS, who have been surveyed regularly since they were schoolchildren in the 1990s. The HCAP assessment was administered in 2023 at an average age of 37 years (10–90 range 34 to 41).

For each individual, the CFA generates a general cognitive performance score, and cognitive performance scores for five distinct domains, including memory, executive functioning, language, orientation to time and place, and visuospatial functioning.

Fit of the models to the data was adequate for general cognitive performance (root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.03; comparative fit index (CFI)=0.94; standardised root mean residual (SRMR)=0.05), language (RMSEA=0.02; CFI=0.95; SRMR=0.05) and good for memory (RMSEA=0.05; CFI=0.99; SRMR=0.02) and executive functioning (RMSEA=0.03; CFI=0.98; SRMR=0.03). The CFA indicate that the factor structure is consistent with findings from other countries and that reliability for the general cognitive performance score was high. Statistical models also suggest invariance at the scalar level for leading demographic (gender, age) and socioeconomic (education, occupational complexity) characteristics.

This study demonstrates that the cognitive functioning of mid-age Kenyans appears to be well captured by the adapted protocol. While there is a moderate decline in cognitive performance among older individuals, this relationship appears to be mediated by education, indicating that this KLPS HCAP provides a valuable baseline for studying future cognitive decline.

To study the reliability and validity of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) scores measured using a questionnaire versus abstraction of medical records, and to test whether the scores vary by history of bilateral oophorectomy, or by age and presence of anxiety or depressive symptoms at the time of questionnaire administration.

The study involved a reliability component and a predictive validity component.

A population-based sample in Olmsted County, Minnesota, was derived from the Mayo Clinic Cohort Study of Oophorectomy and Aging-2.

We included 198 women who underwent premenopausal bilateral oophorectomy for a non-malignant indication between 1988 and 2007 and 174 referent women of the same age randomly sampled from the general population (total of 372 women). At a later time (median of 22.7 years later), the women were contacted and invited to self-administer the ACE questionnaire during an inperson visit. Independent of the visit, their medical records were abstracted for ACE by a physician.

Questionnaire and abstraction-based ACE scores.

Agreement between the two ACE scores (reliability; weighted kappa statistics) and comparison of incidence of multimorbidity in women with ACE scores ≥1 vs 0 (predictive validity; survival analyses). Data were analysed in March and April 2024.

The 372 women in the study had a median age of 65 years at the time of ACE questionnaire self-administration (IQR, 62–69). Questionnaire-based ACE scores showed moderate agreement with abstracted ACE scores (weighted kappa 0.44 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.54)). The cut-off score of ACE ≥1 showed an overall fair agreement between the two scores (kappa 0.33 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.43)). A comparison of the cumulative incidence of multimorbidity in women with an ACE score ≥1 versus women with ACE score of 0 yielded a HR of 1.13 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.27) for abstracted ACE and 1.13 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.27) for questionnaire-based ACE. The best predictive validity was for ACE measured by both methods combined (either or) with a HR of 1.29 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.46).

Questionnaire-based ACE scores have moderate agreement with medical records abstracted ACE scores. However, both sets of ACE scores are predictive of the accumulation of multimorbidity at older age and should be considered complementary.

To describe diagnostic and management characteristics of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) among participants in the ‘Searching for a Technology-Driven Acute Rheumatic Fever Test’ study, in order to answer clinical questions and determine epidemiological and practice differences in different settings.

Multisite, prospective cohort study.

One hospital in northern Australia and two hospitals in New Zealand, 2018–2021.

143 episodes of definite, probable or possible ARF among 141 participants (median age 10 years, range 5–23; 98% Indigenous).

Participant characteristics, clinical, biochemical and echocardiographic data were explored using descriptive data. Associations with length of stay were determined using multivariable regression analysis.

ARF presentations were heterogeneous with the most common ARF ‘phenotype’ in 19% of cases being carditis with joint manifestations (polyarthritis, monarthritis or polyarthralgia), fever and PR prolongation. The total proportion of children with carditis was 61%. Australian compared with New Zealand participants more commonly had ARF recurrence (22% vs 0%), underlying RHD (48% vs 0%), possible/probable ARF (23% vs 9%) and were underweight (64% vs 16%). Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) provided an incremental diagnostic yield of 21% compared with C reactive protein. No instances of RHD were diagnosed among participants in New Zealand. Positive throat Group A Streptococcus culture was more common in New Zealand than in Australian participants (69% vs 3%). Children often required prolonged hospitalisation, with median hospital length-of-stay being 7 days (range 2–66). Significant predictors for length of stay in a multivariable regression model were valve disease (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.56, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.98, p

This study provides new knowledge on ARF characteristics and management and highlights international variation in diagnostic and management practice. Differing approaches need to be aligned. Meanwhile, locally specific information can help guide patient expectations after ARF diagnosis.

Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a common manual therapy intervention provided by healthcare providers for patients with low back pain (LBP). Responses to SMT are influenced by interactions between the patient and provider. Contextual factors may be specific to the patient, provider, patient-provider relationship or environment in which treatment is provided, with all capable of influencing clinical outcomes. The overall goal of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of contextual factors associated with manual therapy utilisation, perception and outcomes, from both patient and provider perspectives. A better understanding of modifiable contextual factors will inform future studies testing the impact on how SMT is delivered to patients influences clinical outcomes that could potentially advance the clinical science of manual therapy.

A prospective, single-arm study design with follow-up measures assessed up to 26 weeks after initiation of physical therapy for LBP will be used to assess relationships between physical therapy clinical outcomes and contextual factors related to the patient (preference, expectation, pain beliefs, pain associated distress and prior manual therapy experiences), the provider (equipoise, expectation, pain beliefs and clinical experience) and the interaction between the two (therapeutic alliance). Multimodal treatment approach of SMT (required during initial three treatment sessions within a 2week period), exercise and education supported by recent clinical practice guidelines will be encouraged for this study.

Ethics approval for the study was obtained from the University of Florida Institutional Review Board. Informed consent is required for physical therapist and patient participant enrolment in this project. The results of this study will be disseminated at professional scientific conferences and submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Reference or approval number: IRB#: IRB202301700

NCT06590116.