The prevalence of HIV in adolescents is a major global health concern, and research into the influence of HIV on mental health outcomes in this demographic is ongoing. We will conduct a comprehensive systematic review of common mental health outcomes in adolescents with HIV infection (aged 10–24 years). Recognising the specific psychosocial issues that adolescents living with HIV infection are confronted with, this review aims to integrate existing research on the prevalence, risk factors and protective factors related to both positive and negative mental health outcomes in this population.

The following electronic databases will be searched for publications from 1959 up to December 2025: PubMed, PsycINFO, Global Health, Embase, African Journals OnLine and African Index Medicus. The review will focus on both positive and negative mental health outcomes: positive outcomes include resilience, subjective happiness and post-traumatic growth, whereas the negative outcomes include depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance use disorder and suicidality. Peer-reviewed primary observational studies that report prevalence rates for common mental health outcomes outlined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition, and the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Edition, their associated factors, as well as barriers to and facilitators of use of mental health support services among this population, will be included in the review. Google Scholar and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global as well as Electronic Theses and Dissertations from Ghana, South Africa, Uganda and Kenya, will also be searched for grey literature. The review will be limited to publications in English or French. To assess the methodological rigour of the selected studies, the Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal Tools will be used. The synthesis will include a narrative summary and, if applicable, a meta-analysis of quantitative data depending on the extent of heterogeneity observed in the included studies. Subgroup analyses will be conducted to investigate differences in mental health outcomes by age, sex and socioeconomic position, where applicable. This systematic review will be reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement.

This review will use secondary data and does not require ethical approval. The findings will be shared through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The emphasis will be on translating research findings into practical mental health interventions and HIV-specific support services for adolescents.

CRD42024568512.

Individuals are diagnosed with terminal/chronic conditions on a daily basis globally. Unfortunately, a substantial proportion of the global disease burden of chronic illnesses is recorded within sub-Saharan Africa. Providing or receiving such news can be devastating and may be influenced by cultural preferences and contextual differences. Identifying existing trends and how such news is broken in sub-Saharan Africa will be relevant to identify and inform practice and future research.

This systematic review protocol was developed by following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA-P), and findings will be reported by following the guidelines and recommendations of PRISMA-2020. CINAHL, Global Health, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, AJOL and APA PsycINFO will be searched for articles. Additional records will be gathered through reference harvesting in Google Scholar search. QualSyst will be used to assess the methodological quality of studies included. Thematic synthesis will be used to analyse and synthesise the findings from the eligible studies.

Due to the fact that systematic reviews focus on accessible and available literature without the direct involvement of human participants, ethical approval will not be sought. The completed review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and may be presented at health conferences. The important findings would be shared with stakeholders and those involved in developing and conducting training for health practitioners, all of whom are involved in breaking bad news.

CRD42025642707.

Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) is regarded as the gold standard for evidence synthesis. However, diverse recommendations and guidance on its conduct exist, and there is no consensus-based tool for the critical appraisal of a completed IPD-MA. We aim to close this gap by systematically identifying quality items and developing and validating a critical appraisal checklist for IPD-MA.

This study will comprise three phases, as follows:

Phase 1: a systematic methodology review to identify potential checklist domains and items; this will be conducted according to the Cochrane methods for systematic reviews and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis 2020 guidance. We will include studies that address methodological guides and essential statistical requirements for IPD-MA. We will use the proposed items to prepare a preliminary checklist for the e-Delphi study.

Phase 2: at least two rounds of an e-Delphi survey will be conducted among panels with expertise in IPD-MA research, consensus development, healthcare providers, journal editors, healthcare policymakers, patients and public partners from diverse geographic locations with experience in IPD-MA. Participants will use Qualtrics software to rate items on a 5-point Likert scale. The Wilcoxon matched signed rank test will estimate response stability across rounds. Consensus on including an item will be achieved if ≥75% of the panel rates the item as ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ and items will be excluded if ≥75% rates it as ‘strongly disagree’ or ‘disagree’. A convenience sample of 10 reviewers with experience in conducting an IPD-MA will pilot-test the checklist to provide practical feedback that will be used to refine the checklist.

Phase 3: critical appraisal checklist validation: to improve confidence in the tool’s uptake, a subset of the e-Delphi participants and graduate students of epidemiology and biostatistics will conduct content validity and reliability testing, respectively, per the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments.

Ethics approval has been obtained from the Western University Health Science Research Ethics Board in Canada. The validated checklist will be published in a peer-reviewed open-access journal and shared across the networks of this study’s steering committee, Cochrane IPD-MA group and the institutions’ social media platforms.