Poverty can have profound negative impacts on parent, child and family health. Primary care providers are in a unique position to address child poverty. Some team-based models have integrated community support workers (CSWs) for social service system navigation assistance. The overall aim of this study is to rigorously test a poverty reduction intervention (navigation of financial supports) embedded in primary care. The primary objective is to compare parenting stress between CSW-supported, structured review of financial supports and social system navigation (intervention) and receipt of written summary of local resources (usual care).

This is a multisite pragmatic superiority randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation to the CSW-supported social system navigation versus no navigation. Parent–child dyads (80 parents of children aged Do you ever have difficulty making ends meet at the end of the month?’) will be recruited during a scheduled health supervision visit from primary care practices in Kingston, Ontario. Intervention group participants will have a structured review of financial supports with a trained CSW and will meet up to 6 times over 6 months. Outcomes are measured at baseline, 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is the Parenting Stress Index Fourth Edition Short Form (PSI-4-SF) total score at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include household income, food insecurity, parent mental health (depression and anxiety) and child health. An internal pilot study was used to obtain more reliable estimates of the SD of PSI-4-SF at 6 months to recalculate the sample size (if needed) and assess randomisation and completion rates. Qualitative interviews conducted 9 months after enrolment explore parent experiences with the CSW intervention.

Research ethics approval by Queen’s University Health Sciences REB. Results will be shared with the College of Family Physicians of Canada, the Ontario SPOR SUPPORT Unit and academic forums.

Connecting Families (Registered 12 October 2021 at www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT05091957).

To assess the validity of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) healthcare database diagnosis codes for lithium toxicity at hospital admission in Ontario, Canada.

Population-based retrospective validation study.

A total of 152 hospitals linked to a provincial laboratory database in Ontario, Canada, from 2007 to 2023.

Patients 50 years of age or older taking lithium with hospital-based serum lithium laboratory measurements during admission to the hospital (n=2804).

Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) comparing an ICD-10 diagnostic coding algorithm for lithium toxicity to a serum lithium concentration of 1.5 mmol/L or more. The codes used in the algorithm were T568, T435, Y495, X41 and X49. Serum lithium values and changes in the concentration of serum lithium from baseline levels in patients with and without a diagnosis code for lithium toxicity (code-positive and code-negative, respectively).

The sensitivity of the ICD-10 coding algorithm for identifying a serum lithium level≥1.5 mmol/L was 84% (95% CI 81% to 87%). The specificity and the NPV were over 88%, and the PPV was 63% (95% CI 60% to 66%). The median (IQR) serum lithium measurement in code-positive patients was 1.7 (1.2 to 2.2) mmol/L, and it was 0.6 (0.4 to 0.9) mmol/L in code-negative patients. The median (IQR) increase in serum lithium concentration compared with the most recent prehospital baseline values was 0.7 (0.2 to 1.3) mmol/L in code-positive patients and 0.0 (–0.2 to 0.2) mmol/L in code-negative patients.

In Ontario, the sensitivity of the ICD-10 coding algorithms was moderate for identifying a serum lithium level≥1.5 mmol/L at hospital admission. The presence or absence of the ICD-10 codes for lithium toxicity at hospital admission successfully differentiated two groups of patients with distinct serum lithium measurements.

Patients receiving haemodialysis are at very high risk of fragility fracture, yet there are no proven treatments for fracture prevention. We will advance a pilot study on the feasibility of a large, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial (RCT) of denosumab for fragility fracture prevention in haemodialysis.

PRevEnting FracturEs in REnal Disease-1 is a pragmatic, open-label, pilot study of an RCT of a denosumab care pathway embedded in routine care haemodialysis centres.

We will recruit at least 60 participants at high risk of fracture from at least 6 haemodialysis centres in Ontario, Canada. They must be aged 40 years or older, have access to provincial drug coverage, have appropriate baseline calcium and parathyroid hormone levels and be deemed suitable for denosumab by their kidney care provider. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to denosumab (with supports to mitigate hypocalcaemia) versus usual care using block randomisation by a central statistician (computer-generated sequence). Primary outcomes include recruitment feasibility and adherence. Secondary outcomes include safety (hypocalcaemia) and participant satisfaction with our protocol and processes. Study investigators and data analysts will be blind to treatment allocation.

We will present results descriptively. The trial was approved by Clinical Trials Ontario and local research ethics boards across study sites.

Primary and secondary outcomes will be published on trial completion.

This pilot will inform the feasibility of conducting a large-scale, efficiently run, pragmatic RCT to test whether a denosumab care pathway safely reduces the risk of fragility fracture in patients receiving haemodialysis. Results have the potential to transform fracture care in real-world patients with kidney and metabolic bone disease.

NCT05096195.

As the opioid crisis continues, people who use drugs (PWUD) experience a disproportionate burden of both HIV and overdose, driven by increased injection-related HIV outbreaks and an opaque and rapidly evolving drug market, respectively. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV and point-of-care drug checking services are underused yet potentially impactful interventions to address the harms of the opioid crisis. Implementing such interventions using known strategies to enhance client engagement and reduce access barriers, such as street outreach, mobile services and peer navigation, can optimise intervention and maximise their impact.

The Substance Checking Outreach and PrEP Engagement (SCOPE) Study is a non-randomised clinical trial evaluating the impact of the Check It intervention, a mobile community PrEP and drug checking intervention in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. SCOPE will recruit a cohort of 500 PWUD at risk for HIV through street-based recruitment methods. Cohort members will be followed semi-annually for 18 months. The primary study outcomes are engagement with the PrEP continuum of care and the number of non-fatal overdoses. We will use both random effects models and marginal structural models to estimate the effects of Check It on participant engagement on the PrEP continuum and the number of non-fatal overdoses over time.

Study procedures have been approved by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Institutional Review Board. Risks to participants are low, with the most serious risk being potential data confidentiality breaches. This risk was minimised through the use of secure data storage platforms with limited user access. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed manuscripts, academic presentations, and reports and fact sheets designed for lay audiences.

This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (study ID: NCT05977881; Protocol ID: 00017498).