To develop and user-test a patient decision aid for people diagnosed with degenerative cervical myelopathy and who are considering surgery.

Mixed-methods study describing the development of a patient decision aid.

A draft decision aid was developed by a multidisciplinary steering group (including study authors with degenerative cervical myelopathy, health professionals and researchers) informed by the best available evidence, authorship consensus and existing patient decision aids.

Patient-participants and health professional-participants who manage people with degenerative cervical myelopathy were recruited through social media and the steering group’s research and practice network. Quantitative questionnaires were used to gather baseline data, descriptive feedback, refine the decision aid and assess its acceptability. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted online to gather feedback on the decision aid and were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

We conducted 32 interviews: 19 patient-participants and 13 health professional-participants who manage people with degenerative cervical myelopathy (neurosurgeons, neurologists, physiotherapists, orthopaedic surgeons, general practitioners, rehabilitation and pain specialists and consultant occupational physicians and chiropractors). Participants were from 10 countries (Australia, Canada, Cyprus, Germany, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and USA). Most participants rated the decision aid’s acceptability as good-to-excellent and agreed with most aspects of the decision aid (eg, defining degenerative cervical myelopathy, management recommendations, potential benefits and harms, questions to consider asking a health professional).

Our patient decision aid was rated as an acceptable tool by both health professional-participants who treat degenerative cervical myelopathy and patient-participants with lived experience of degenerative cervical myelopathy. This decision aid can be used by clinicians and people with degenerative cervical myelopathy to help with shared decision making following a diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy. A study testing the potential benefits of this decision aid in a clinical setting is recommended.

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).

The literature examining direct-to-consumer (DTC) commercial virtual care has expanded rapidly over the past decade. Our objective was to synthesise the nature and range of evidence on DTC commercial virtual care.

Scoping review.

MEDLINE ALL, EMBASE Classic+Embase, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, PsycINFO, CENTRAL and grey literature sources.

We included original research studies published in English or French between 1 January 2016 and 30 April 2025 that assessed DTC commercial virtual care in all contexts and in all populations.

Screening titles and abstracts, and full-text manuscripts, and extracting data was done in duplicate. We analysed quantitative data using descriptive statistics and reported findings in tables. We provided a narrative summary of textual data.

After excluding duplicates, we identified 8055 studies for title and abstract screening; 691 articles for full-text screening; and 103 studies meeting our inclusion criteria. 32 studies (31.1%) reported financial ties to the virtual care industry. 67 (65.0%) studies were conducted in the USA. Studies were largely quantitative (87/103 (84.5%)) or mixed methods (8/103 (7.8%)) studies and used cross-sectional (85/95 (89.5%)) designs. Most quantitative studies were descriptive, reporting on quality of care, health outcomes, platform characteristics and patient views, with only 24 of the 95 quantitative studies (25.3%) including a control or comparison group. 18 of these 24 studies (75.0%) compared the quality of care, costs and/or utilisation to other models of care and reported variable findings. The rest compared patient characteristics. Few studies assessed clinician perspectives or addressed privacy-related ethical concerns.

Despite a large number of studies assessing DTC commercial virtual care, we have little insight into impacts on quality of care, health outcomes, health system utilisation and privacy-related ethical concerns. The financial ties with industry suggest that there may be bias in the body of research literature.

Accurate identification of adverse events after colonoscopy is essential for quality assurance in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Review of medical records is labour intensive as adverse events are infrequent. The object of this study was to investigate the accuracy of claims data in identifying adverse events after colonoscopy in CRC screening.

Cross-sectional, retrospective.

Males and females aged 50–74 years were randomised to once-only sigmoidoscopy or biennial faecal immunochemical test in a CRC screening trial at two screening centres in Norway. Participants in the present study underwent follow-up colonoscopy from 2012 to April 2020 after initial positive screening test. We reviewed medical records for adverse events within 30 days following 11 205 colonoscopies.

The primary outcome of the study was to assess the sensitivity of claims data from the Norwegian Patient Registry to identify lower gastrointestinal bleeding using emergency contact International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision diagnostic code sets under two definitions: a stringent definition (codes explicitly identifying bleeding) and a broad definition (including suggestive codes). Secondary outcome measures included the sensitivity to identify perforation using a stringent and a broad definition. Additionally, we assessed whether incorporating procedure codes and non-emergency contacts improved accuracy.

87 cases of lower gastrointestinal bleeding and eight perforations were confirmed. Sensitivity for bleeding differed between the centres (p

Use of claims data underestimated adverse event rates following colonoscopy. Difference in coding practice across hospitals underscores the need for standardised reporting in screening programmes.

NCT01538550.

This study assessed whether a previously developed Monte Carlo simulation model can be reused for evaluating various strategies to minimise time-to-treatment in southwest Netherlands for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients who had an ischaemic stroke.

Reuse of a previously developed simulation model to simulate various strategies in another region, using prospectively collected data from stroke centres and retrospective data from emergency medical services.

Data from 509 patients who had an ischaemic stroke (≥18 years) treated with EVT (2014–2018) were used.

Input for the simulation model reuse included distributions of observed time delays along the acute stroke pathway. Validation of the baseline models was based on face validity and statistical measures (patient data vs model output) using the Assessment of the Validation Status of Health Economic decision models tool. We simulated strategies for a subregion: interhospital patient transfer by helicopter, transport of the neurointerventionalist to the primary stroke centre (‘drive-the-doctor’), interhospital patient transfer to a thrombectomy-capable stroke centre (TSC) outside the region and prehospital triage using the Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation (RACE) scale.

Onset-to-groin time was the outcome.

Reuse of the original simulation model was obtained by minimal effort, implying limited adaptation. Compared with the baseline model, interhospital patient transfer by helicopter or to a TSC outside the region and prehospital routing using the RACE scale reduced mean onset-to-groin time by 16, 13 and 39 min, respectively (95% CrI for all: equal to the point estimate). ‘Drive the doctor’ reduced mean onset-to-groin time by 27 (car), 49 (ambulance) or 58 min (helicopter), each with a 95% CrI equal to the point estimate.

The original simulation model can be applied to different regions in the Netherlands. Strategies tested within the subregion resulted in promising results of ‘drive the doctor’ and prehospital patient routing using the RACE scale.

Although individuals with dementia who reside in nursing homes are particularly susceptible to developing delirium, this condition is rarely recognised in these settings. Detection of delirium requires validated and reliable tools for this setting that can be applied by nursing staff. The primary objective of the study is to assess the comprehensibility, practicality and inter-rater reliability of two delirium detection tools (4 A’s test (4AT) and 4-item delirium superimposed on dementia (4-DSD)) and one tool for assessing both the diagnosis and severity of delirium (Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R-98)) in people with dementia who reside in nursing homes when used by nurses.

The comprehensibility and practicality of the German versions of the 4AT, 4-DSD and DRS-R-98 will be evaluated using cognitive interviews in accordance with the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments framework. On the basis of the results of the cognitive interviews, a manual for each of the three tools will be developed and finalised by an expert panel. Finally, the inter-rater reliability and measurement error of the three tools will be determined using the manuals. For this purpose, a total of 70 residents from six nursing homes will be assessed by at least two nurses. The data analysis will include descriptive statistics and inter-rater reliability assessment for individual items (kappa value) and total scores (Intraclass correlation coefficients).

This study will assess the comprehensibility, practicality and inter-rater reliability of the 4AT, 4-DSD and DRS-R-98 for use in residents with dementia in nursing homes. The project was approved by the medical ethics committee of the University of Oldenburg (reference number: 2025-093).

The inter-rater reliability study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register. Registration number: DRKS00037458 (https://www.drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00037458/details).

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are central to generating high-quality evidence in the surgical field but face unique methodological and practical challenges, including recruitment, follow-up, blinding and ensuring patient-centred outcomes. Patient and public involvement (PPI) has emerged as a promising strategy to enhance the relevance, quality and impact of surgical research by actively involving patients throughout the whole research process. Despite growing recognition of its value, the integration and reporting of PPI in surgical RCTs remain inconsistent, and no systematic evaluation has yet addressed its application within general and abdominal surgery.

RCTs in general and abdominal surgery published since 2014 will be identified through systematic searches of the databases MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL. This systematic review and primary (meta-epidemiological) statistical analysis will assess the reporting prevalence, implementation extent and quality of PPI over time. The Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 (GRIPP2)-SF checklist and Cochrane Risk of Bias V.2.0 tool will be used to evaluate PPI reporting and study quality. To enable a comparison between studies reporting PPI and those that do not, propensity score matching will be performed to identify non-PPI studies with similar population and design characteristics. Subsequently, regression analyses will be employed to investigate potential associations between PPI reporting and various trial characteristics, including patient recruitment and retention, outcome selection and methodological quality. The Patient Advisory Board of the Study Centre of the German Society of Surgery is actively engaged in all phases of the systematic review.

This systematic review does not require ethical approval. Results will be published in an international peer-reviewed scientific journal, as well as distributed in a lay format to the patient community and to the broader public.

CRD42024524426.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a prevalent, chronic condition generating considerable global morbidity, mortality and socioeconomic burden. Despite the availability of established pharmacotherapies, overall treatment uptake remains low and effect sizes are moderate at best. Emerging evidence highlights substantial differences in treatment response between sexes and genders, yet these factors are rarely systematically considered in clinical trials or routine care. Existing reviews have limited scope and often exclude gender-diverse populations. This project aims to (1) Synthesise evidence on gender- and sex-specific efficacy, safety and adherence in AUD pharmacotherapies, (2) Evaluate the consideration of sex and gender beyond binary classifications in existing research and (3) Develop recommendations for gender- and sex-sensitive treatment strategies.

A systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted using (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, German Clinical Trials Register and ClinicalTrials.gov). We will include randomised controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for AUD with a minimum treatment duration of 4 weeks, reporting gender-specific and/or sex-specific results. The literature search will cover studies published up to October 2025, with inclusion restricted to articles published in English or German, regardless of setting. Two reviewers will independently screen records and assess risk of bias (Cochrane RoB), with evidence certainty evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and aligned to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 and Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines.

Ethics approval is not required as only data from already completed studies and supplementary information directly provided by study authors are used. Findings and recommendations will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences and workshops.

CRD420251079160.

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of delivering a vocational rehabilitation intervention (Return to Work After Trauma—ROWTATE), remotely to individuals recovering from traumatic injuries. The primary objectives were to assess therapists’ training and competence, adapt the intervention and training for remote delivery and assess the feasibility and fidelity of remote delivery to inform a definitive randomised controlled trial.

A mixed-methods feasibility study incorporating (1) telerehabilitation qualitative literature review, (2) qualitative interviews preintervention and postintervention with therapists and patients, (3) a team objective structured clinical examination to assess competency, (4) usefulness of training, attitudes towards (15-item Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale) and confidence in (4-item Evidence Based Practice Confidence Scale) evidence-based practice, intervention delivery confidence (8-bespoke questions) and intervention behaviour determinants (51-items Theoretical Domains Framework) and (5) single-arm intervention delivery feasibility study.

The study was conducted in two UK Major Trauma Centres. The intervention and training were adapted for remote delivery due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Therapists: Seven occupational therapists (OTs) and clinical psychologists (CPs) were trained, and six participated in competency assessment. Seven OTs and CPs participated in preintervention interviews and surveys; six completed post-intervention interviews and four completed post-training surveys. Patients: 10 patients were enrolled in the single-arm feasibility study and 4 of these participated in postintervention qualitative interviews. Inclusion criteria included therapists involved in vocational rehabilitation delivery and patients admitted to major trauma centres. Exclusion criteria included participation in other vocational rehabilitation trials or those who had returned to work or education for at least 80% of preinjury hours. Intervention: The ROWTATE vocational rehabilitation intervention was delivered remotely by trained OTs and CPs. Training included competency assessments, mentoring and adaptation for telerehabilitation. The intervention was delivered over multiple sessions, with content tailored to individual patient needs.

Therapists found the training useful, reported positive attitudes (Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale mean=2.9 (SD 0.9)) and high levels of confidence in delivering evidence-based practice (range 75%–100%) and the ROWTATE intervention (range 80%–100%). Intervention barriers identified pretraining became facilitators post-training. Half the therapists needed additional support post-training through mentoring or additional training. The intervention and training were successfully adapted for remote delivery. High levels of fidelity (intervention components delivered: OTs=84.5%, CPs=92.9%) and session attendance rates were found (median: OT=97%, CP=100%). Virtually all sessions were delivered remotely (OT=98%, CP=100%). The intervention was acceptable to patients and therapists; both considered face-to-face delivery where necessary was important.

The ROWTATE intervention was delivered remotely with high fidelity and attendance and was acceptable to patients and therapists. Definitive trial key changes include modifying therapist training, competency assessment, face-to-face intervention delivery where necessary and addressing lower fidelity intervention components.

ISRCTN74668529.

Infant-centred and family-centred developmental care (IFCDC) within the frame of special intensive care prioritises a holistic approach to caring for infants by addressing their developmental and emotional needs. A key principle of IFCDC is the active involvement of parents in care, which promotes better long-term outcomes for both the infant and their caregivers. This scoping review aims to examine parental satisfaction and the challenges associated with their involvement in infant care by assessing the global implementation of the IFCDC principle of parental involvement in specialised intensive care settings.

The scoping review will follow the methodological framework outlined by Khalil et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. Literature from 2014 to 2025 will be searched for relevant papers across PubMed (MEDLINE). Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full texts, with a third reviewer resolving conflicts. Key findings and results from eligible papers will be analysed and summarised in line with the scoping review’s objectives.

No ethical approval is needed. We intend to submit the paper for publication and thus to present the results in a peer-reviewed journal. This scoping review is registered at OSFREGISTRIES (https://osf.io/h94qr/?view_only=a08b30a5eb3a4a3d97aeda7c6d7e157d).

To increase the sustainability of healthcare, clinical trials must assess the environmental impact of interventions alongside clinical outcomes. This should be guided by Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extensions, which will be developed by The Implementing Climate and Environmental Outcomes in Trials Group. The objective of the scoping review is to describe the existing methods for reporting and measuring environmental outcomes in randomised trials. The results will be used to inform the future development of the SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions on environmental outcomes (SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE).

This protocol outlines the methodology for a scoping review, which will be conducted in two distinct sections: (1) identifying any existing guidelines, reviews or methodological studies describing environmental impacts of interventions and (2) identifying how environmental outcomes are reported in randomised trial protocols and trial results. A search specialist will search major medical databases, reference lists of trial publications and clinical trial registries to identify relevant publications. Data from the included studies will be extracted independently by two review authors. Based on the results, a preliminary list of items for the SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions will be developed.

This study does not include any human participants, and ethics approval is not required according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The findings from the scoping review will be published in international peer-reviewed journals, and the findings will be used to inform the design of a Delphi survey of relevant stakeholders.

Registered with Open Science 28 of February 2025.

Fractures over venous sinuses (FOVSs) are associated with difficulties in diagnosis and treatment resulting in a high level of morbidity and mortality. Despite its importance, there are limited aggregate data to guide the management of these fractures ultimately inflicting a major callenge to neurosurgeons. This protocol describes the methodology of a scoping review that aims to synthesise contemporary evidence on the management and outcomes of FOVSs.

The proposed study will be conducted in accordance with the Arksey and O’Malley’s framework for scoping reviews. The research question, eligibility criteria and search strategy were developed based on the population, intervention, comparator and outcome strategy. The following electronic bibliographic databases will be searched without restrictions on language and date of publication: PubMed, WHO Global Index Medicus, African Journals Online, SCOPUS, Embase, Cochrane and ProQuest Central. All peer-reviewed studies of primary data reporting on the management and outcomes of FOVSs will be included. The data extracted from included articles will be presented through descriptive statistics, pooled statistics and a narrative description.

Because this study did not directly involve human individuals, ethical approval was not necessary. Dissemination strategies will include publication in a peer-reviewed journal, oral and poster presentations at local, regional, national and international conferences and promotion over social media.

The WHO has declared climate change the defining public health challenge of the 21st century. Incorporating climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials is essential for enhancing healthcare treatments’ sustainability and safeguarding global health. To implement such outcomes, it is necessary to establish a framework for unbiased and transparent planning and reporting. We aim to develop extensions to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT 2025) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2025) statements by introducing guidelines for reporting climate and environmental outcomes.

This is a protocol for SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions on reporting climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials termed SPIRIT-Implementing Climate and Environmental (ICE) and CONSORT-ICE. The development of the extensions will consist of five phases: phase 1—project launch, phase 2—review of the literature, phase 3—Delphi survey, phase 4—consensus meeting and phase 5—dissemination and implementation. The phases are expected to overlap. The SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE extensions will be developed in parallel. The extensions will guide researchers on how and what to report when assessing climate and environmental outcomes.

The protocol was submitted to the Danish Research Ethics Committees, Denmark in June 2025. Ethics approval is expected in September 2025. The SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.

Patients receiving long-term ventilation (LTV) in out-of-hospital intensive care facilities often suffer from persistent impairments of their cognition, mental health and physical health, limiting their social participation. Chronically ill patients are often unable to express their care preferences. Thus, their medical care often lacks integration of patients’ wishes and values. Telemedicine may be used to collect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) from these patients to align medical care with their preferences. Early integration of teleconsultation to provide rapid support for specific patient symptoms can reduce economic costs.

This is a multicentre, prospective, non-blinded, single-arm interventional trial with a pre-post design and follows the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement. 10 out-of-hospital intensive care facilities in Berlin and Brandenburg, Germany, are grouped into three clusters. The study population includes adult patients (≥18 years) receiving LTV and residing in participating care facilities. During the preintervention phase, standard patient care remains unchanged. From the start of the intervention phase, enrolled patients receive telemedicine rounds in addition to standard care. These telemedicine rounds, conducted at least weekly, involve on-site healthcare professionals, patients and their relatives. Data are collected at predefined time points—study months 1,3, 9, 15 and 21—with a target of 57 participants at each time point. The study aims to evaluate whether a structured telemedicine intervention (1) increases the proportion of patients receiving record-documented PROMs in routine care and (2) reduces hospital readmissions. Secondary outcomes include the evaluation of post-intensive care syndrome, healthcare costs and the usability, applicability and perceived benefits of telemedicine. Additionally, qualitative interviews with patients, their relatives and healthcare professionals will explore individual experiences with chronic critical illness, the perceived quality of life of the patients and how team members manage moral distress in caregiving contexts. A mixed-effects logistic regression model will be used to analyse patients’ access to PROMs, while a mixed-effects Poisson regression model will be employed to evaluate hospital readmission rates. The findings may provide valuable insights into how telemedicine can improve patient-centred care for this particular patient group.

This study protocol received approval from the Ethics Committee of Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany (EA2/136/22). The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and presented at international conferences.

This study was registered in the ‘German Register of Clinical Studies’ (DRKS; DRKS00029326).

The Cardiometabolic function in Offspring, Mother and Placenta after Assisted Reproductive Technology (COMPART) study is a prospective cohort study aiming to explore health outcomes in mothers and children following assisted reproductive technology (ART), with a particular focus on frozen embryo transfer (FET) versus fresh embryo transfer (fresh-ET). The increasing prevalence of ART and FET emphasises the need to assess potential health risks associated with the procedures, both in pregnancy, such as pre-eclampsia and large for gestational age offspring, and in the children, such as obesity and cardiometabolic dysfunction.

The cohort will include 600 pregnant women, their potential partner and their offspring in a 1:1:1 ratio of pregnancies achieved after ART with FET, ART with fresh-ET and women who conceived naturally. The study will involve extensive data collection from electronic medical records; parental questionnaires; biochemical, genetic and epigenetic analyses in blood, urine and placental tissue; and medical imaging (fetal ultrasound and PEA POD scan) and clinical examinations. Outcomes are grouped into six work packages (WPs) related to fetal growth (WP1), pregnancy (WP2), placenta (WP3), offspring (WP4), genetics (WP5) and epigenetics (WP6).

The COMPART study aims to provide valuable insights into the impact of ART and FET on maternal and offspring health and the underlying mechanisms responsible. The study seeks to advance reproductive medicine, shape clinical practice and guidelines and ultimately ensure maternal-fetal health following ART. The study has been approved by the Danish Ethics Committee (H-23071266; February 2024).

NCT06334003

Given that low retention rates are a prevalent challenge in clinical trials, which ultimately affects trial validity, it is recommended that interventions be developed and evaluated to increase trial retention. In the context of trial retention, incorporating behavioural science is endorsed, as it provides a theoretical foundation for considering human behaviour. We hypothesised that an intervention informed by self-determination theory could increase retention in a randomised allergy trial on intralymphatic immunotherapy, as the support of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness is anticipated to lead to more sustained engagement and better outcomes.

To assess the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and evaluation design, following the complex intervention framework by the Medical Research Council, before proceeding to a randomised evaluation.

A parallel two-arm randomised feasibility study was conducted within the randomised allergy trial.

All participants at one Danish site were eligible for recruitment.

The intervention was a web app informed by self-determination theory to support the basic psychological needs through its thoughtfully designed features. Participants were allocated unblinded across treatment groups to complete daily online questionnaires over a 100-day period from May to August 2022. All participants received a daily text message with a link for the questionnaires. On completion, participants in the control group received a confirmation message, while participants in the intervention group had a browser with the menu of the web app opened for them. The features within the menu were voluntary to use.

The prespecified assessments included evaluating the recruitment rate, retention rate (which reflected both sustained participation and the proportion of completed daily questionnaire entries), the suitability of outcome measures and the acceptability of the intervention and evaluation design to both participants and staff. Qualitative data were collected through a collaborative learning process with participants from the intervention group in November 2022.

A total of 30 participants were invited, randomly assigned 1:1 and analysed, resulting in a recruitment rate of 100%. None were lost to follow-up as all remained in the study for the entire duration. The response rate was 84.5% in the intervention group and 79.1% in the control group, indicating satisfactory retention. Outcome measures were deemed appropriate. No unintended adverse events were identified. The collaborative learning meetings involved three participants in the first meeting and two in the second, comprising a total of five different individuals. Participants found the intervention acceptable. They used it differently but agreed that its components were useful. Technical issues needed fixing, and voluntary free text boxes and registration of medication dosage should be added.

The intervention and evaluation design were assessed as acceptable and feasible. Technical issues were fixed, and additional response options were added before a randomised evaluation.

ILIT.NU: EudraCT 2020-001060-28. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05191186.

Perioperative adverse events increase morbidity and mortality. The rate and severity of complications and the risk for subsequent mortality are increased after high-risk procedures and in elevated-risk patients. Over the past decades, a multitude of prognostic studies identified perioperative risk factors at the population level. However, to allow for the advancement of precision surgery strategies, improved risk prediction on the individual patient level is warranted. Comprehensive, consecutive, multisource, structured, high-quality patient-related and procedure-related data sets, together with thorough follow-up and combined with state-of-the-art machine-learning analyses, are needed to facilitate precise prediction of perioperative complications. Therefore, we designed and currently conduct the Heidelberg Perioperative Deep Data study (HeiPoDD). Here, we report the rationale and design of the HeiPoDD study.

HeiPoDD is a prospective, single-centre, exploratory cohort study aiming to build up a large-scale deep-data base and corresponding biomaterial collection. 1040 adult patients planned for elective high-risk, non-cardiac surgery for any indication at Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany will be included. The obtained study-specific data set includes clinical data, lab values, genome- and proteome analysis as well as plasma, serum and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) collected before and at days 1, 3 and 7 postsurgery. Urine samples are collected before and at day 1 postsurgery. Structured follow-up for perioperative complications such as redo-surgery, length of intensive care stay or length of hospital stay is conducted at days 30, 90 and 1 year postsurgery and for disease progression and survival after 3 and 5 years postsurgery. All study data will be transferred to the HeiPoDD registry to allow merging with all available routine clinical data from the hospital information system including imaging studies as well as haemodynamic and respiratory biosignals. Biomaterials will be stored in the HeiPoDD biomaterial bank to allow further analyses.

The trial protocol and amendments were approved by the ethics committee of the University of Heidelberg (S-758/2021). The protocol is registered with the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00024625). Participating patients’ data will be recorded only in pseudonymised form. After completion of the study, data collected during the study will be kept on file for up to 30 years. Biomedical samples collected during the study and entered into the biobank will be held for the same amount of time. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed academic journals.

Outcome after surgery depends on both patient-related as well as procedure-related risks. Complications after surgery are a significant burden to patients and to the health system. A vast amount of often unstructured data from different sources are generated during surgery, which contain valuable information associated with outcome. Advances in computer hardware and machine learning now increasingly facilitate the development of prediction models in standardised, parametric, information-rich areas such as the perioperative setting. For the development and validation of risk scores and prediction models, high-fidelity data sources are required to arrive at meaningful and reliable predictions. However, data quality standards in retrospective studies are rarely met. Therefore, the prospective Heidelberg Perioperative Deep Data Registry and Biomaterial Bank (HeiPoDD - Registry and Bio Bank) was started to implement a clinical data base and a corresponding biobank merging the entirety of available clinical records.

The HeiPoDD - Registry and Bio Bank is a study-driven, prospective, single-centre observational registry data base and biomaterial bank. It contains data and material from eligible patients who give informed consent and undergo elective non-cardiac high-risk surgery at the surgical centre of the Heidelberg University Hospital. The screening for eligibility started in January 2022, with no maximum sample size specified in advance. Routine data are recorded and stored during hospital stay and potential readmissions within 90 days after index surgery. The data are merged with the potentially available genome, proteome, flow cytometry, and bio signal data. Endpoints are obtained from routine observations, stored data in the hospital information system and follow-up visits. Further, data and biological specimens from separate perioperative studies with the patients’ consent can be transferred into the HeiPoDD - Registry and Bio Bank as well. This large-scale data collection will allow the calculation of endpoint-specific prediction models using logistic regression models as well as machine learning models. The first 1040 patients included in the HeiPoDD - Registry and Bio Bank are also included in the HeiPoDD study.

The trial protocol and subsequent amendments were approved by the ethics committee of the University of Heidelberg (S-745/2021). Participating patients’ data will be entered only in pseudonymised form. Data and biomaterials will be kept for up to 30 years. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed academic journals.

DRKS00025924, registered on 2021-11-12.