Detecting chronic kidney disease (CKD) early can provide opportunities to optimise native kidney function, prevent further decline and plan for timely kidney transplantation if required. Understanding how children are found to have kidney disease and present to specialist kidney care may help tailor interventions to support a timelier diagnosis. The aim of this study was to examine the pathway to specialist care for UK children who present late to nephrology with advanced CKD (requiring kidney replacement therapy within 90 days of first nephrology review) to determine whether there are modifiable aspects to presentation and diagnosis.

Semi-structured, in-depth qualitative study. A topic guide based on the theoretical framework of health behaviour by Scott et al, The Model of Pathways to Treatment, was developed to capture differences in symptom appraisal and help-seeking before reaching nephrology care.

UK paediatric nephrology units (n=4) between December 2017 and December 2020.

Children and young people who experienced a late presentation of CKD and their parents/carers.

Twenty-two participants participated across 19 interviews: seven children (two male, median age 16, IQR 13–17.5 years) and 15 parents. A typology of presentation to healthcare was identified: commonly, families reported repeated cycles of primary care help-seeking before onward referral to specialist care, although long appraisal intervals were also noted. In all cases, secondary care referral led to onward nephrology care involvement. Narratives highlighted that not all cases of late presentation could be avoided.

A typology of symptom appraisal and help-seeking can inform interventions to improve CKD detection. Interventions that support symptom appraisal and consideration of targeted CKD testing in children may help reduce appraisal and help-seeking intervals, respectively.

In response to the high maternal mortality in Afghanistan, the government emphasised enhancing antenatal care (ANC) coverage to improve skilled birth attendance and reduce maternal mortality. This study aimed to explain how and why ANC interventions worked, for whom, and under what circumstances in Afghanistan between 2000 and 2024.

A rapid realist review was conducted to identify underlying programme theories and examine contextual factors and key mechanisms influencing ANC outcomes, with input from a panel of national experts. Data were extracted using context–mechanism–outcome (CMO) configurations to develop and refine theories for policy recommendations.

From 3502 papers, 1860 duplicates were removed, 63 were screened for full text and 25 were included in the final review. In total, 29 CMOs were inferred across nine interventions, classified at individual, interpersonal, community and institutional levels. We found that ANC interventions could work best by empowering women and healthcare workers (HCWs), involving husbands, hiring female community health workers (CHWs), ensuring regular contact with the same HCWs, endorsing health messages by the government, incentivising CHWs and designing and implementing interventions using participatory approaches. Interventions are less successful when there is a lack of community trust in service quality or HCW qualifications, low decision-making ability among women, discomfort during travel to health facilities, adherence to traditional practices and beliefs, hiring CHWs from outside the community, chronic stress and lack of support among HCWs and unrecognised incentives.

Our evidence synthesis can inform donors, policymakers and implementers on how to design more effective ANC interventions to achieve better health outcomes in Afghanistan. By emphasising intervention evaluation and ANC quality improvement, it highlights the importance of key social elements, such as cultural norms, power dynamics, relationships, beliefs and trust, which are likely to maximise impact. Community involvement is essential for designing and implementing effective and sustainable ANC interventions.

Cellulitis is a common bacterial skin infection causing significant pain, swelling and impact on daily activities, frequently leading to emergency department presentations and hospital admissions. While antibiotics are the mainstay of treatment, they do not directly address inflammation, often resulting in persisting or worsening symptoms in the initial days. Corticosteroids, with their potent anti-inflammatory effects, have shown benefit in other acute infections but are not currently standard care for patients with cellulitis. This trial aims to determine if adjunctive oral dexamethasone can reduce pain and improve outcomes in adults with cellulitis presenting to UK urgent secondary care settings.

This is a pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, parallel group, phase 3 superiority trial, with an internal pilot and parallel health economic evaluation. Adult patients (≥16 years) with a clinical diagnosis of cellulitis (at any body site except the orbit) presenting to urgent secondary care will be screened for eligibility. 450 participants will be randomised (1:1) to receive either two 8 mg doses of oral dexamethasone or matched placebo, administered approximately 24 hours apart, in addition to standard antibiotic therapy. The primary outcome is total pain experienced over the first 3 days postrandomisation, calculated using the standardised area under the curve from pain scores (Numerical Rating Scale 0–10) across up to seven timepoints. Secondary outcomes include health-related quality of life (EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level), patient global impression of improvement, analgesia and antibiotic usage, hospital (re)admissions, complications, unscheduled healthcare use, cellulitis recurrence and cost-effectiveness at 90 days. The primary estimand will apply a treatment policy approach to intercurrent events.

The trial has received ethical approval from South Central—Oxford B Research Ethics Committee (reference: 24/SC/0289) and will be conducted in compliance with Good Clinical Practice and applicable regulations. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. A model consent form can be seen in . Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, and to patient groups and relevant clinical guideline committees.

ISRCTN76873478.

The high prevalence of loneliness in young people, aged 10–24 years, is increasingly recognised as an urgent global health concern. The experience of loneliness is linked to a wide range of adverse physical and mental health outcomes. A lack of loneliness scales that can accurately capture the authentic experiences of young people has hampered progress in our understanding of the aetiology and sequelae of youth loneliness, as well as the development of preventative policies and interventions. Here, we provide a protocol for developing and validating an age-sensitive loneliness scale for young people aged 10–24 years: the Youth Loneliness Scale (YLS). The scale is designed to measure loneliness in the general population of young people in the UK.

The scale is coproduced with young people from design to dissemination. The scale development process follows a three-phased, multistep approach that includes item development, scale construction and scale evaluation. Item development is achieved via deductive (literature review) and inductive methods (arts workshops and focus groups), as well as a Delphi survey of experts (by profession and experience) for initial refinement. The scale is then constructed via pretesting items in cognitive interviews with young people, and exploratory testing for preliminary evaluation and refinement. Finally, the scale is administered in confirmatory testing, where a full psychometric evaluation is provided.

The project was approved by the Queen Mary University of London Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 2024-0231-341) as the lead site and subsequently endorsed by the University of Manchester Research Ethics Committee. The YLS scale and results of its psychometric evaluation will be published open-access. The protocol provided here will allow researchers to evaluate the final scale generated against the plans set out. We also encourage the use and adaptation of the protocol to develop age-sensitive loneliness scales for other populations.