Cognitive impairment is considered a challenge in medication management for both the affected patient as well as their caregiver. Numerous studies have investigated interventions aiming to improve medication therapy safety in this population; however, there is insufficient knowledge on interventions which support patients and caregivers effectively. The aim of this systematic review is to (1) identify interventions to improve medication therapy safety in older patients with cognitive impairment, and (2) to evaluate their effectiveness.

We will conduct a systematic review of literature with participatory elements of public involvement in every step of the process. Five literature databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL) will be screened to identify interventions to improve medication therapy safety in older (≥65 years of age) adults with cognitive impairment. To support methodology and evidence synthesis, we will conduct expert panel discussions as well as focus group discussions of caregivers and healthcare professionals. Study selection, data extraction and bias assessment will be conducted independently by two reviewers. For data synthesis, studies will be organised by setting (eg, community setting, hospital setting, nursing home setting).

The responsible Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of Heidelberg granted approval for the public involvement strategies in this project (S-562/2024). Results will be presented by publication in an academic journal and at scientific conferences.

CRD42024623352.

Progress at the intersection of artificial intelligence and paediatric neuroimaging necessitates large, heterogeneous datasets to generate robust and generalisable models. Retrospective analysis of clinical brain MRI scans offers a promising avenue to augment prospective research datasets, leveraging the extensive repositories of scans routinely acquired by hospital systems in the course of clinical care. Here, we present a systematic protocol for identifying ‘scans with limited imaging pathology’ through machine-assisted manual review of radiology reports.

The protocol employs a standardised grading scheme developed with expert neuroradiologists and implemented by non-clinician graders. Categorising scans based on the presence or absence of significant pathology and image quality concerns facilitates the repurposing of clinical brain MRI data for brain research. Such an approach has the potential to harness vast clinical imaging archives—exemplified by over 250 000 brain MRIs at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia—to address demographic biases in research participation, to increase sample size and to improve replicability in neurodevelopmental imaging research. Ultimately, this protocol aims to enable scalable, reliable identification of clinical control brain MRIs, supporting large-scale, generalisable neuroimaging studies of typical brain development and neurogenetic conditions.

Studies using datasets generated from this protocol will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at academic conferences.

To evaluate the safeguarding impact of government commitment (defined as the proportion of government expenditure relative to total expenditure) to health and immunisation financing in mitigating the disruptions to routine childhood vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A quasi-experimental difference-in-differences study with country fixed effect, leveraging the COVID-19 pandemic as a natural experiment.

Low-income and middle-income countries.

A cohort of 131 low- and middle-income countries from 2010 to 2023.

Our primary outcomes included the coverage rates for the third dose of the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis containing vaccine (DTP3) and the first dose of the measles containing vaccine (MCV1).

Both high government commitment countries (ie, above the upper 20th percentile) and low government commitment countries (ie, below the upper 20th percentile) experienced declines in immunisation coverage over the 4 years following the COVID-19 pandemic, with DTP3 and MCV1 decreasing by 4 and 5 percentage points, respectively (p

Greater government commitment to health and immunisation financing may not be sufficient on its own to mitigate pandemic-related disruptions in routine childhood vaccination.

This study explored how Structured Medication Reviews (SMRs) are being undertaken and the challenges to their successful implementation and sustainability.

A cross-sectional mixed methods online survey.

Primary care in England.

120 clinical pharmacists with experience in conducting SMRs in primary care.

Survey responses were received from clinical pharmacists working in 15 different regions. The majority were independent prescribers (62%, n=74), and most were employed by Primary Care Networks (65%, n=78), delivering SMRs for one or more general practices. 61% (n=73) had completed, or were currently enrolled in, the approved training pathway. Patient selection was largely driven by the primary care contract specification: care home residents, patients with polypharmacy, patients on medicines commonly associated with medication errors, patients with severe frailty and/or patients using potentially addictive pain management medication. Only 26% (n=36) of respondents reported providing patients with information in advance. The majority of SMRs were undertaken remotely by telephone and were 21–30 min in length. Much variation was reported in approaches to conducting SMRs, with SMRs in care homes being deemed the most challenging due to additional complexities involved. Challenges included not having sufficient time to prepare adequately, address complex polypharmacy and complete follow-up work generated by SMRs, issues relating to organisational support, competing national priorities and lack of ‘buy-in’ from some patients and General Practitioners.

These results offer insights into the role being played by the clinical pharmacy workforce in a new country-wide initiative to improve the quality and safety of care for patients taking multiple medicines. Better patient preparation and trust, alongside continuing professional development, more support and oversight for clinical pharmacists conducting SMRs, could lead to more efficient medication reviews. However, a formal evaluation of the potential of SMRs to optimise safe medicines use for patients in England is now warranted.