The WHO Safe Childbirth Checklist (WHO SCC) was developed to accelerate adoption of essential practices that prevent maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality during childbirth. This study aims to summarise the current landscape of organisations and facilities that have implemented the WHO SCC and compare the published strategies used to implement the WHO SCC implementation in both successful and unsuccessful efforts.
This scoping review protocol follows the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute. Data will be collected and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews report. The search strategy will include publications from the databases Scopus, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science, in addition to a search in grey literature in The National Library of Australia’s Trobe, DART-Europe E-Theses Portal, Electronic Theses Online Service, Theses Canada, Google Scholar and Theses and dissertations from Latin America. Data extraction will include data on general information, study characteristics, organisations involved, sociodemographic context, implementation strategies, indicators of implementation process, frameworks used to design or evaluate the strategy, implementation outcomes and final considerations. Critical analysis of implementation strategies and outcomes will be performed with researchers with experience implementing the WHO SCC.
The study does not require an ethical review due to its design as a scoping review of the literature. The results will be submitted for publication to a scientific journal and all relevant data from this study will be made available in Dataverse.
The paediatric population represents a quarter of the world’s population, and like adult patients, they have also suffered immeasurably from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Immunisation is an effective strategy for reducing the number of COVID-19 cases. With the advancements in vaccination for younger age groups, parents or guardians have raised doubts and questions about adverse effects and the number of doses required. Therefore, systematic reviews focusing on this population are needed to consolidate evidence that can help in decision-making and clinical practice. This protocol aims to assess the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in paediatric patients and evaluate the correlation between the number of vaccine doses and side effects.
We will search the PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Scopus and Cochrane databases for randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials that list the adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccine and assess its correlation with the number of doses, without any language restrictions. Two reviewers will select the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extract data and asses for risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The Review Software Manager (RevMan V.5.4.1) will be used to synthesise the data. We will use the Working Group’s Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations to grade the strength of the evidence of the results.
Formal ethical approval is not required as no primary data are collected. This systematic review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication.
CRD42023390077.
BioMD-Y is a comprehensive biobank study of children and adolescents with major depression (MD) and their healthy peers in Germany, collecting a host of both biological and psychosocial information from the participants and their parents with the aim of exploring genetic and environmental risk and protective factors for MD in children and adolescents.
Children and adolescents aged 8–18 years are recruited to either the clinical case group (MD, diagnosis of MD disorder) or the typically developing control group (absence of any psychiatric condition).
To date, four publications on both genetic and environmental risk and resilience factors (including FKBP5, glucocorticoid receptor activation, polygenic risk scores, psychosocial and sociodemographic risk and resilience factors) have been published based on the BioMD-Y sample.
Data collection is currently scheduled to continue into 2026. Research questions will be further addressed using available measures.
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survivors suffer from impaired physical and psychological functioning and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) that persist after active treatment ends. Sustaining rehabilitation benefits, promoting a healthy lifestyle and facilitating self-management at home require a multifaceted aftercare programme. We aim to investigate the effect of a 12-week digital lifestyle intervention on HRQoL and lifestyle-related outcomes in NSCLC survivors after completion of inpatient rehabilitation.
QUAlity of life in LUng CAncer Survivors (QUALUCA) is a multicentre randomised controlled trial that follows a hybrid type 1 design. We randomly allocate participants in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention group (digital lifestyle intervention) or the control group (standard care) using block randomisation stratified by tumour stage and study site. Four accredited Swiss inpatient rehabilitation centres recruit participants. Key inclusion criteria are a diagnosis of NSCLC, an estimated life expectancy of ≥6 months and access to a smartphone or tablet. The 12-week intervention comprises physical activity, nutrition and breathing/relaxation, delivered through a mobile application (app). The primary outcome is the change in HRQoL from baseline (1 week after rehabilitation) to follow-up (3 months after baseline), assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). Secondary outcomes include body mass index, self-reported physical activity, exercise capacity, risk of low protein intake, appetite, psychological distress, cancer-related fatigue, enablement and self-rated health. Explanatory outcomes in the intervention group include app usability, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the intervention, experiences and satisfaction with the intervention, and app usage data. We aim to enrol 88 participants. For the main statistical analysis, we will use analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline measures, stratification variables, age and sex.
The Ethics Committees of the Canton of Zurich (lead), the Canton of Bern and Northwest and Central Switzerland approved the study (2023-00245). We will disseminate study results to researchers, health professionals, study participants and relevant organisations, and through publications in international peer-reviewed journals.
Systematic review of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies undertaken in the WHO European Region to measure pre-existing and cumulative seropositivity prior to the roll out of vaccination programmes.
A systematic review of the literature.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the preprint servers MedRxiv and BioRxiv in the WHO ‘COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease’ database using a predefined search strategy. Articles were supplemented with unpublished WHO-supported Unity-aligned seroprevalence studies and other studies reported directly to WHO Regional Office for Europe and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.
Studies published before the widespread implementation of COVID-19 vaccination programmes in January 2021 among the general population and blood donors, at national and regional levels.
At least two independent researchers extracted the eligible studies; a third researcher resolved any disagreements. Study risk of bias was assessed using a quality scoring system based on sample size, sampling and testing methodologies.
In total, 111 studies from 26 countries published or conducted between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2020 across the WHO European Region were included. A significant heterogeneity in implementation was noted across the studies, with a paucity of studies from the east of the Region. Sixty-four (58%) studies were assessed to be of medium to high risk of bias. Overall, SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity prior to widespread community circulation was very low. National seroprevalence estimates after circulation started ranged from 0% to 51.3% (median 2.2% (IQR 0.7–5.2%); n=124), while subnational estimates ranged from 0% to 52% (median 5.8% (IQR 2.3%–12%); n=101), with the highest estimates in areas following widespread local transmission.
The low levels of SARS-CoV-2 antibody in most populations prior to the start of vaccine programmes underlines the critical importance of targeted vaccination of priority groups at risk of severe disease, while maintaining reduced levels of transmission to minimise population morbidity and mortality.