Potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) in older adults, such as long-term use of benzodiazepines, proton pump inhibitors without indication or antipsychotics in dementia, are associated with adverse events and increased healthcare utilisation. Despite clinical guidelines discouraging their use, PIPs remain frequent in primary care. An audit and feedback (A&F) intervention of PIPs to general practitioners (GPs), led by pharmacists, may reduce the prescription of PIPs in primary care.

A two-arm, pragmatic, controlled trial will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of an A&F-based intervention and a pharmacist-led intervention to reduce the proportion of patients aged ≥65 years receiving inappropriate prescriptions. A total of 170 participating GPs, 85 per group, are required. GPs will be randomised into intervention or control groups (1:1). The intervention includes feedback reports, pharmacist-led academic detailing and access to online training modules. The primary outcome is the proportion of older adults receiving at least one PIP at 12 months as well as the total number of PIPs. A random effects Tobit regression model, censored at 0 and 100, will be used to estimate between-group differences adjusted for baseline prescribing. Subgroup analyses will explore heterogeneity of effect by baseline prescribing level and healthcare region. Implementation outcomes, including reach, fidelity, engagement and maintenance, will be evaluated using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework, combining quantitative and qualitative data.

Ethical approval was obtained by the Balearic Island Committee Ethics (IB5219/23PI). Study findings, including primary and secondary outcomes and qualitative implementation results, will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and stakeholder reports.

ISRCTN14449434.

Real-world effectiveness of a new treatment is relevant information for patients, healthcare professionals and payers, especially when patients encountered in routine clinical care differ significantly from those recruited in the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that led to approval. However, obtaining effect estimates can be challenging when a new drug has only recently been marketed and real-world data (RWD) are not yet available. For new breast cancer (BC) therapies, we illustrate how RCT inferences can be transported to a target population and how a synthetic population can be generated to mimic a target population for which no RWD is yet available.

In our framework, we defined the data-generating process for the RCT population and the real-world (target) population with confounders, effect-modulating covariates and survival times as outcomes. First, we conducted generalisability and transportability (G&T) analyses to transport the RCT results to the simulated target population, applying the inverse probability of sampling weighting and outcome model-based estimator approach. We then used Synthea to generate a synthetic target population based on German BC survival rates and combined both approaches into a coherent strategy.

Effect estimates (HRs with 95% CIs) transported from the RCT to our defined target population closely matched the expected real-world effect (RCT: 0.68 (0.65; 0.71); real-world: 0.75 (0.71; 0.79); transported from RCT: 0.76 (0.71; 0.81)). BC survival rates were very similar between observed and synthetic data (prediction error in absolute survival rates: 1.62%).

Combining G&T with synthetic data may inform decision-making in situations where RWD are not (yet) available.

The needs of patients in palliative care (PC) are multiple and changing. Several tools assess them, but there is a lack of homogeneity among them. A specific diagnostic tool to assess complexity in PC (IDC-Pal: Instrumento Diagnóstico de la Complejidad en Cuidados Paliativos, in Spanish) was created in community and hospital settings with 36 items to diagnose PC complexity, but its application in primary care is difficult.

(1) To generate an adapted version to primary care of the IDC-Pal tool to identify and stratify PC complexity in the adult population. (2) To determine face, content, criterion and construct validity and reliability of the new instrument.

There are three phases of clinimetric cross-sectional observational validation study: Phase 0: Review of the original tool structure suitability for its use in primary care setting by a committee (researchers and the original developer team). Phase 1: Expert consensus phase by Delphi technique with physicians, nurses and social workers from primary care and PC. Phase 2: Empirical validation of the resulting tool in primary care using a cross-sectional descriptive design involving physicians and case manager nurses from across Andalucia, who will recruit adult patients with PC needs from healthcare centres that accept to participate in the study. Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha, McDonald’s omega, interclass correlation coefficient) and construct validity (exploratory factor analysis) analysis will be carried out; convergent criterion validity will be assessed with the NEC-PAL (Necesidades Paliativas Questionnaire, in Spanish) instrument. Differences by gender, type of professional and place where it is administered will be explored. Interobserver reliability analyses will be carried out using intraclass correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman plots and concordance analysis. Phase 0–1 results were expected by 2025 and Phase 2 results by 2026. Reporting method: CRISP checklist. This protocol was conducted without patient or public participation.

This study evaluates a novel, co-designed tool to diagnose PC complexity to inform practice recommendations for a more efficient allocation of resources that may be included in future clinical practice guidelines. The study has been approved by the Provincial Research Ethics Committee of Málaga as of July 2023 and will be conducted in accordance with the principles established in the Declaration of Helsinki, the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, and the requirements established in Spanish legislation. The study conforms to the norms of good clinical practice. All participants in the Delphi study must express their agreement to participate in the survey by providing informed consent (IC) before beginning the questionnaire. For the development of Phase 2, the primary care professionals who agree to participate will sign a researcher commitment, and the patients included in the study will sign a written IC before the data collection. Dissemination of the results will inform future research on the appropriate diagnosis of PC complexity in the primary care setting, which is of paramount importance due to its gatekeeper position. Dissemination will be aimed at academics and healthcare professionals through publications, presentations and training workshops on the use of the diagnostic tool.