Intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) is a leading cause of ischaemic stroke, particularly among Asian populations, and continues to impose a significant burden across the region. Despite this, evidence from Asia remains fragmented. Findings from our previously conducted scoping review revealed an absence of standardised diagnostic criteria and imaging protocols. This resulted in marked methodological inconsistencies in regional ICAS research, thereby limiting the validity and interpretability of existing data. To address this, we have initiated a consensus process that aims to establish standardised definitions, develop harmonised diagnostic protocols and outline research standards and priorities for ICAS across Asia.

A modified Delphi approach will be employed to formulate consensus-based recommendations through a structured, iterative, multistage process. Draft Delphi statements will be informed by targeted literature reviews and formatted into five-point Likert scale questionnaires with fields allowing for qualitative feedback. An expert core group was selected based on their established clinical and research expertise in intracranial atherosclerosis, cerebrovascular imaging and stroke, with deliberate consideration for geographic and disciplinary diversity. This group will serve as the formal voting panel. The process will comprise three to four anonymous online rounds, with a predefined consensus threshold of ≥80% agreement. Statements that do not reach consensus will be revised based on aggregated feedback and re-evaluated in subsequent rounds. A non-voting hybrid conference, open to the public, will follow the second round to facilitate broader engagement and discussion; relevant points will be incorporated into the subsequent round. Consensus on research standards and priorities will follow the finalisation of recommendations on standardised definitions and harmonised diagnostic protocols to ensure alignment with preceding outcomes.

This consensus was granted exemption by the Jose R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center Institutional Review Board (No. 2025–221). Resulting recommendations will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentation at scientific fora.

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MB6GP.

The roles of pharmacy staff have expanded to include public health functions, such as delivering harm reduction services for people who use drugs (PWUD), particularly unregulated substances and non-medical drug use, in response to an ongoing drug overdose crisis. Nonetheless, their involvement across the full spectrum of harm reduction services remains underexplored. This study mapped existing research describing or evaluating the implementation of harm reduction services for PWUD provided by pharmacy staff.

Scoping review.

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library (inception to July 2025).

Studies reporting on the description or evaluation of harm reduction services for PWUD provided by pharmacy staff.

Two team members screened studies for eligibility and extracted the data. The data were analysed primarily to describe harm reduction services and the role of pharmacy staff.

43 articles were included. The most frequently reported harm reduction services were sexually transmitted and blood-borne infection care (33%), needle and syringe programmes (21%), naloxone distribution (19%) and medication treatment for opioid use disorder (19%). Pharmacy staff were integrated into multidisciplinary teams (79%), with their roles varying from education to medication prescribing. Included studies reported harm reduction services for PWUD delivered by pharmacy staff as effective, feasible and safe. However, implementations were not tailored to equity-deserving populations. Services primarily addressed opioid-related harms, while strategies focusing on the use of non-opioid substances were limited.

This scoping review highlights the diverse roles pharmacy staff play in delivering harm reduction services for PWUD. Positioned at the intersection of accessibility and healthcare delivery, pharmacy staff are ideally situated to expand access to equitable care. To fully harness this potential, future research and practice should embed harm reduction as a core philosophy, extending beyond individual interventions to support the creation of person-centred, non-judgmental and low-barrier services.

Paediatric palliative care (PPC) improves the quality of life of children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions, with caregivers playing an important role. Providing PPC in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) is challenging due to limited resources, inadequate access to specialised care, financial constraints, and cultural or religious beliefs. This study aims to synthesise qualitative research on the experiences of primary care givers caring for children with cancer receiving palliative care in LMICs.

A systematic search will be conducted using electronic databases: MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Health Literature), Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Additional articles will be searched in the reference list of the selected articles. Review questions will be framed into different components according to the Population, phenomena of Interest, Context, and Outcome (PICO) framework. Primary caregivers of children with cancer will be the population of interest. Both title and abstract screening and full-text screening will be done by two independent reviewers. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. The thematic synthesis approach will be followed as it will allow a transparent summarising of the qualitative data.

This study is not subject to ethics approval, as the work is carried out on published documents. The findings of this review will be disseminated among a broader audience through scientific channels, including publication in open-access journals and presentations at both national and international forums.

CRD420251065491.

There is an unmet clinical need for the development of novel treatment strategies to improve the outcome of children with frequent relapsing or steroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome. Obinutuzumab (OBI) is a second-generation anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated its superiority to rituximab (RTX) in vitro and in vivo. Our assumption is that a single infusion of low-dose OBI will induce longer B-cell depletion, longer sustained remission and reduce the frequency of relapses and the use of oral immunosuppressors compared with a single infusion of RTX.

We conduct a double-blind, multicentre, randomised, parallel group in a 1:1 ratio controlled trial. In the experimental group, patients receive 1 infusion of OBI (300 mg/1.73 m²) and in the control group, the patients receive 1 infusion of RTX (375 mg/m²). The primary outcome of the study is the occurrence of the first relapse within 12 months following the initiation of treatment and secondary outcomes include the time to first relapse, the total number of relapses during the 24-month follow-up period, and any adverse events such as infusion-related complications, infectious complications, hypogammaglobulinaemia and neutropenia.

The study has been approved by the ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes) of Sud Méditerrannée 2 and authorised by the French drug regulatory agency (Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé). Results of the primary study and the secondary aims will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

NCT05786768.

2022-003336-59.

Kerato-lenticule extraction (KLEx) is a refractive surgery technique that, in contrast with femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), does not require the creation of a flap to correct refractive defects. The potential advantages of this technique are related to the absence of a flap and its complications. On the other hand, FS-LASIK is the most widely practised refractive surgery worldwide, as it offers excellent visual outcomes and is currently the gold standard of refractive surgery. The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness and safety of KLEx versus FS-LASIK as a treatment option in patients with myopia or myopic astigmatism.

This double-masked, parallel-group, single-centre randomised clinical trial will enrol 80 eyes from adults with myopia or compound myopic astigmatism within the ranges sphere –0.50 to –12.00 D and cylinder –0.50 to –6.00 D, recruited at the Instituto de Oftalmología Conde de Valenciana, Mexico City, Mexico. Participants will be allocated to KLEx or FS-LASIK and assessed at baseline and 1 day, 1 week, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome is uncorrected visual acuity at all postoperative visits. Secondary outcomes include postoperative spherical equivalent, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), loss of ≥2 BCVA lines, the proportion of eyes within ±0.50 D of the refractive target, corneal aberrations over a 5 mm pupil, epithelial changes and adverse events. Participants and outcome assessors will be masked to the assigned surgical technique.

Participant confidentiality will be maintained with the publication of results. This study was approved by the research and ethics committee of the Instituto de Oftalmología Fundación de Asistencia Privada Conde Valenciana (CI-017-2024). The study results will be disseminated in scientific articles published in peer-reviewed journals and presented through research posters at national and international conferences.

ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT06477081).

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) has been proposed as an oncologically superior surgical technique for right-sided colon cancer, mirroring the impact of total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer. While promising results have been reported, evidence from routine clinical practice, particularly within Swiss healthcare settings, remains limited. This study aims to evaluate the surgical and oncological outcomes of CME compared with standard right hemicolectomy (non-CME) over a 10-year period.

This is a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent right hemicolectomy, either CME or non-CME, for histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the right colon or right third of the transverse colon at a tertiary centre, between 2010 and 2020. Patients with concomitant malignancies or distant metastases will be excluded. The primary outcome is 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes include number of harvested lymph nodes, 3-year and 5-year overall survival, and 30-day morbidity.

This study was approved by the relevant Ethics Committee (CER-VD 2025-00503). All patients provided general consent for secondary use of anonymised data. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences.

Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a prevalent condition among breast cancer survivors, often exacerbated by oncological treatments. Hormonal therapies are typically contraindicated in this population, necessitating effective non-hormonal interventions.

This randomised controlled trial aims to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multimodal pelvic floor physiotherapy—comprising pelvic floor muscle training, non-ablative radiofrequency, therapeutic pelvic health education and the use of vaginal moisturisers—versus fractional CO₂ laser therapy combined with vaginal moisturisers in alleviating GSM symptoms in breast cancer survivors. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two intervention groups. Primary outcomes include measures of sexual function (assessed by the Female Sexual Function Index), subjective pelvic perineal pain intensity (measured with a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale) and health-related quality of life (assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast), assessed at baseline, post-intervention and at 3, 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Statistical analyses will be conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

The study protocol has been approved by the Ethics and Health Research Committee of the University of Alcalá (Reference: CEIP/2024/1/012). All participants will provide informed consent prior to inclusion in the study. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations, and by engaging with patient associations and survivor groups through tailored materials.

NCT06721936.

Corticosteroid injections are widely used as first-line treatment for trigger finger, but their comparative efficacy against other non-surgical and surgical interventions remains unclear. While previous meta-analyses have explored this topic, many were limited by a narrow scope or methodological constraints. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroid injections in adult trigger finger management compared with alternative treatment modalities, using robust methodology and updated evidence to guide clinical decision-making.

A systematic search will be conducted to identify the articles published on PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. All randomised controlled trials that compared (1) corticosteroid injection with alternative non-surgical modalities and (2) corticosteroid injection with surgical intervention in adults diagnosed with trigger finger will be included for the review. Two reviewers will independently perform the processes of study inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. The primary outcome will be assessed by improvement in triggering and pain symptoms. Secondary outcomes will be assessed through safety assessment. The risk of bias and meta-analysis will be conducted using by RevMan V.5.4.

Ethical approval is not required for this study as it is a review based on published studies. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis results are expected to provide valuable information for clinicians to choose an optimal strategy for the management of trigger finger.

CRD42024547312.

Despite a lack of evidence relating to effectiveness and safety, the use of apps in the field of mental health is increasing due to their ease of use and accessibility. The aim of the EvalDepApps project is to develop and validate an assessment tool for evaluating depression management apps based on scientific evidence, expert judgement and end-user needs.

The purpose of this study was to determine the most relevant criteria for evaluating apps intended to manage depression through consensus-based assessment.

A total of 43 individuals were invited to participate in an online modified Delphi study of 51 criteria identified from the literature. In Round 1, participants rated criteria according to relevance and three levels of consensus were defined: high level when ≥80% of respondents scored the criterion at 5 or 6; medium when 60%–79% of respondents scored the criterion at 5 or 6 and low when

The response rate was 59.0% (26/43) in Round 1 and 53.4% (23/43) in Round 2. In Round 1, 24 criteria (47.1%) attained the maximum level of consensus, 20 (39.2%) the medium level and 7 (13.7%) the lowest level. In Round 2, 4 out of 20 criteria (20.0%) attained the maximum consensus. Participant comments reinforced the relevance of the selected criteria. The final list consisted of 28 criteria, the majority relating to Safety and Privacy and Clinical Effectiveness (25.0% each), followed by Usability and Functionality (17.9%).

By prioritising criteria relating to data safety and clinical effectiveness, participants in this study emphasised that the assessment of apps for depression management must take both these aspects into full consideration. Despite some limitations of the study (eg, lack of participant sociodemographic data and its implications for generalisation, not face-to-face inter-round), the results of this study will enable the EvalDepApps project to develop an assessment tool for depression management apps that incorporates the most relevant criteria.

EvalDepApps will support healthcare professionals and users in identifying safe, effective and user-friendly depression management apps.

Heightened rates of mental illness among children, young people and forcibly displaced adults are well-documented. Despite this, access to care in host countries is often low. Problem-management plus (PM+) is an intervention developed by the WHO that can be delivered through task-shifting by lay counsellors and has been shown to be effective in numerous studies. At the same time, it has been shown that PM+ has a limited effect on traumatic stress symptoms, a common problem among forcibly displaced individuals. In turn, to further these benefits, a novel emotional processing (EP) module has been developed to be adjunctively delivered alongside PM+(PM+EP).

The current study is a randomised controlled feasibility and acceptability study. 60 participants aged 16–25 will be randomly allocated to either PM+, PM+EP or care as usual. The primary outcome of this study will be the feasibility and acceptability of the delivery of PM+EP in forcibly displaced youth. Secondary outcomes are self-rated measures of distress, depression and anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, personally identified problems, hope, use of services and medications, general well-being and social support.

Following ethical approval in February 2024, recruitment commenced in October 2024. Study completion is anticipated by December 2025. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and communication with relevant stakeholders.

NCT06878092.

Safety culture is essential to improving healthcare quality. Paediatric emergency departments are high-risk environments where evaluating safety culture helps identify areas for improvement. This study aimed to analyse the safety culture among professionals in paediatric emergency departments, according to job category and gender.

Multicentre cross-sectional study using the Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSOPSC).

19 paediatric emergency departments, covering all levels of care.

1843 healthcare professionals were invited to participate; the response rate was 63.8%, and 33% of respondents were nurses. All clinical staff in paediatric emergency departments were eligible. Professionals from other specialties and non-clinical staff were excluded.

The primary outcome was the assessment of patient safety culture using the HSOPSC, following the methodology of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Secondary outcomes included comparisons by job category and gender, and an exploratory cluster analysis.

In terms of patient safety, the main strength was ‘teamwork within units’ (83.65% positive), while the main weakness was ‘staffing’ (61.92% negative). Patient safety was rated with an average score of 7.21 by the participants. Paediatricians rated ‘manager expectations’ significantly higher than nurses (p=0.023) and residents (p=0.026). Paediatricians gave more positive responses overall, with significant differences in ‘communication openness’, ‘feedback and communication’, ‘non-punitive response’ and ‘teamwork across units’, though none were classified as strengths. Cluster analysis showed that the group with more paediatricians identified more strengths and no weaknesses, while the group with more nurses and nursing assistants showed no strengths and significant weaknesses in ‘overall safety perception’, ‘staffing’ and ‘management support’.

Safety culture in paediatric emergency departments is acceptable, but still far from excellent, indicating ample room for improvement. Differences between professional categories, especially between paediatricians and nurses, highlight the need for targeted safety strategies and leadership involvement.

Effective young adults’ sexual health education is crucial for promoting informed decision-making and healthy behaviours. National and international guidelines provide a framework for developing and implementing effective programmes. However, these guidelines may vary in their content, focus and recommendations. This scoping review protocol details a plan to map the literature on national and international young adults’ sexual health education guidelines. The review will focus on identifying key dimensions and characteristics of these interventions.

Guideline selection will be conducted using the Population, Intervention, Professionals, Outcomes and Healthcare setting/context framework. A comprehensive three-stage search of academic databases, grey literature and citation tracking will be conducted to identify all relevant literature. Data extraction will be performed by two independent researchers using a standardised, piloted data charting form to ensure accuracy and minimise bias. The form will capture key guideline characteristics. The process will be iterative, allowing refinement of variables for comprehensive data capture. Findings will be synthesised and presented using diagrams, tables and a narrative summary to provide a clear overview of the existing literature.

Adhering to all relevant guidelines and regulations, this study will proceed under the approval of the Ethics Committee of Shahroud University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran. This scoping review will identify and examine the dimensions and characteristics of national and international guidelines for young adults’ sexual health education. By analysing the dimensions and characteristics of these guidelines, this review will identify commonalities, differences and gaps in the current landscape. The findings will have significant implications for policymakers, educators and researchers engaged in the development and implementation of young adults’ sexual health programmes. The results will be disseminated through publication in a relevant peer-reviewed journal to inform future research and practice in this field.

Ethical code: IR.SHMU.REC.1403.085. URL: https://ethics.research.ac.ir/EthicsProposalView.php?id=494573.