The interfaces between the fields of communication, education and health have been indicated by international institutions such as the WHO and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. However, hegemonic scientific practices supersede dialogue between the three fields, isolating their practices. This fragmenting tendency is observed in scientific literature, which has created gaps in the dialogue and articulation between communication, education and health. Although health promotion requires both communicative and educational practices, the epistemological, historical, political, cultural and socioeconomic aspects have also engendered tensions between the fields. Communication is often seen as a mere instrument for other practices, rather than a phenomenon that (re)produces meanings and power dynamics. In opposing the reductionist and instrumentalising perspectives of knowledge fields, the primary objective of the scoping review is to map the scientific evidence on the interfaces between communication and education in health to indicate a conceptual framework that articulates communication and education practices within the context of health.

A transdisciplinary team developed this protocol based on the 2024 Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The procedures required to conduct the review were guided by the frameworks proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac et al and Peters et al. The study eligibility criteria were established based on the Problem, Concept and Context outlined in the research questions. Primary and secondary studies will be retrieved from nine sources, covering both conventional and grey literature. These sources include Embase, ERIC, LILACS, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science, the Brazilian Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations, and the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. A categorised form will be used for data collection and subsequent analysis. The reporting of the review findings will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

The nature of the research and the use of secondary data sources do not require informed consent forms or approval from ethics committees in Brazil. The scientific findings from the review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, academic conferences and other scientific communication channels.

The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF) and is available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Z3CX7.

Prescription digital therapeutics (PDTx) represent an emerging frontier in healthcare, leveraging software-based solutions to treat or manage specific medical conditions. However, despite rising interest and encouraging evidence of clinical benefits, the policy landscape remains fragmented. Jurisdictions vary widely in their regulatory approaches, reimbursement pathways and processes for clinical integration, thus creating uncertainties for developers, payers and healthcare providers. This protocol outlines an eDelphi study to develop and validate a comprehensive policy maturity framework guiding systematic assessment of national or regional readiness for PDTx adoption.

We will conduct an e-Delphi study with up to three rounds to refine and validate a PDTx policy maturity framework. Experts will be recruited purposively from six stakeholder groups (regulators, healthcare providers, payers/health economists, developers, researchers and patient advocates), prioritising Europe while seeking variation across health system types and levels of economic development; a small number of non-European experts may be invited to broaden perspectives. An optional pilot round will gather initial feedback on the prototype framework, followed by iterative rounds to assess and revise domains, scoring criteria and maturity thresholds. A 5-point Likert scale (from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’) will collect quantitative data, while open-text prompts will capture qualitative insights. Consensus will be defined as ≥70% agreement and/or an IQR ≤1 for critical items. Quantitative summaries and thematic analysis will guide iterative revisions of the model. This Delphi protocol aims to produce a consensus-driven framework that captures the essential elements of PDTx policy development and implementation. If validated, the framework can serve as a reference for policymakers, industry leaders, healthcare providers and researchers seeking to benchmark or advance the adoption of PDTx within health systems.

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto (reference: 320/CEFMUP/2025). Panellists will provide electronic informed consent, and data will be kept confidential. The finalised framework will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and policy briefs targeting stakeholders involved in digital health governance.

The digital transformation of healthcare has created an urgent need for primary care physicians (PCPs) to acquire competencies in digital health. However, the structure and scope of postgraduate training programmes remain poorly defined and unevenly implemented worldwide, and no scoping review has yet synthesised the evidence. This review aims to map existing postgraduate digital health training programmes for PCPs, including their content, structure and delivery approaches.

This scoping review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. A systematic search will be conducted across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect and Web of Science) and relevant grey literature, covering publications from January 2019 to June 2025. Studies describing postgraduate digital health training programmes for PCPs will be eligible for inclusion. Data will be extracted and synthesised descriptively and thematically using an inductive approach.

As this study is based on a review of publicly available literature, ethical approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations and will inform future curriculum development and policy in digital health education for PCPs. The results may also inform national curriculum reforms and accreditation standards, supporting more consistent and competency-based digital health education globally.

This scoping review protocol has been registered with the Open Science Framework.

Ineffective surgery scheduling fails to align demand with need, resulting in financial waste, resource inefficiencies and delays in care, which ultimately lead to poorer patient outcomes. Digital systems present a promising approach to optimising scheduling. However, research examining their impact remains limited. This planned systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of digital surgery scheduling systems on the quality of preoperative care.

A systematic review will be undertaken using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, HMIC and PsycINFO (from inception to the present). The outcomes under investigation include the domains of quality of care (eg, patient-centredness, safety, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness of care and equity). Two independent reviewers will screen and extract data, resolving any disagreements through discussion. Once eligible studies are identified, the extracted data will be summarised in a table. The risk of bias in the articles will be evaluated using the appropriate National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute quality qssessment tool, depending on the study design. A subgroup analysis will be carried out using demographic variables supported by the data. A narrative synthesis and a meta-analysis will be performed, to quantify the impact of digital surgery scheduling tools on reported outcomes.

This proposed review aims to collate and summarise peer-reviewed, published evidence, and therefore, does not require ethical approval. This protocol and the subsequent review will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at conferences and through patient-led lay summaries. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024625469.

Preventing online and offline sexual harassment (SH) is a public health priority, due to its worldwide magnitude and short- and long-term consequences to the victims and survivors. Universities are environments that may facilitate different forms of conflicts, including SH, but they also play a key role in preventing and addressing them. This paper describes ‘Uni4Equity’, a European project funded by the CERV-2022-DAPHNE Programme of the European Union (Ref. 101094121-Uni4Equity) aimed to reinforce universities’ readiness to identify, map and respond to online and offline SH at workplace and other relevant settings (classrooms, digital space), with an explicit (but not exclusive) focus on minority social groups. More specifically, the project will address the research needs of conducting multidimensional diagnosis of SH at universities (scale and determinants) as a basis for preventive actions; assessing the effectiveness of preventive interventions such as social media campaigns and training workshops; creating a university culture that actively rejects SH; improving access to existing support services; and contributing to the acknowledgement of universities as an asset in preventing this issue.

The project follows an exploratory sequential design for the period 2023–2026. In phase 1, a mixed-method initial assessment based on online surveys, semistructured interviews and desk reviews is planned in six targeted universities: University of Alicante, Adam Mickiewicz University (AMU), University of Maia, University of Applied Sciences Burgenland (UASB), University of Antwerp (UAntwerp), University of Verona. Phase 2 integrates long-term and large-scale interventions at different levels of prevention (primary, secondary and tertiary) and implementation (interpersonal, institutional and social). These interventions combine online and offline training programmes addressed to students and staff, arrangements with internal and external support services and improvements in access to information and resources, including SH protocols and regulations. Phase 3 consists of qualitative and quantitative evaluations of the different Uni4Equity interventions and a final evaluation of the global impact of the project.

Ethical approval was obtained by the different universities research ethics committees (Universidad de Alicante, vice-rectorate for research: Ref. no. UA-2023-03-27; Università di Verona, Comitato di Approvazione per la Ricerca sulla Persona: Ref. no. UNIVR-24/2023; UAntwerp, Ethics Committee for the Social Sciences and Humanities: Ref. no. EX_SHW_2023_38_1; AMU, Ethics Committee for Research Involving Human Participants, Ref. no. UAM_19/2022/2023; UASB, Ethics Committee: Ref. no. UASB _28/08/2023; Universidade da Maia, Conselho de Ética e Deontologia: Ref. no. UMAIA_ 151/2023).

The research team will disseminate findings through peer-reviewed journal articles, presentations in scientific national and international events, policy briefs, infographics, videos and short reports.