Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the healthcare field are crucial in meeting the healthcare needs of a progressively diverse society. In fact, a diverse healthcare workforce enables culturally sensitive care, promotes health equity and enhances the understanding of various needs and patients’ viewpoints, potentially resulting in more effective patient treatment and improved patient outcomes. Despite this, information on the effectiveness of policies or programmes promoting EDI in health institutions is scarce. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effects and outcomes of EDI programmes in healthcare institutions.

We will conduct Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of studies on EDI programmes and describe their effects and outcomes in healthcare institutions. We will search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. Selected studies will include randomised control trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cross-sectional studies published either in English or French. Quality appraisal of studies and a narrative synthesis of extracted data will be conducted as well as a meta-analysis if possible. The quality of evidence in this review will be assessed by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

We anticipate that this systematic review will reveal information on the effect of EDI programmes and their outcomes in healthcare institutions. We expect this information will provide insights that will lead to improvements in designing EDI policies and programmes in healthcare institutions.

No ethical clearance is required for this study as no primary data will be collected. The final manuscript will be submitted to a journal for publication. In addition to this, the results of the study will also be disseminated through conference presentations to inform the research and clinical practice.

This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; registration number CRD42024502781.

We aimed to define the epidemiology of COVID-19 outbreaks in aged care facilities (ACFs) during the postvaccine period, including vaccine effectiveness (VE) for this high-risk group.

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were searched through 1 September 2023.

Any original observational studies and trials reporting data on COVID-19 outbreaks among the partially/fully vaccinated residents from ACFs during or after the worldwide implementation of vaccine roll-out.

We estimated the attack rate, case fatality rate, mortality rate and VE during postvaccine period. Random effect model was adopted for meta-analysis. Quality assessment on all included studies was performed using the Meta Quality Appraisal Tool.

38 articles were included from 12 countries reporting 79 outbreaks with 1708 confirmed cases of COVID-19 from 78 ACFs. The pooled attack rate was 28% (95% CI 20% to 37%) among the fully vaccinated residents. Two-thirds (62.5%) of the index cases were unvaccinated healthcare professionals (eg, physicians, nurses) and caregivers. Unvaccinated residents had a significantly higher rates (12%) (95% CI 7% to 19%) of mortality compared with the vaccinated residents (2%) (95% CI% 1 to 4%) and the post-COVID-19 vaccine estimates for case fatality rate (13% vs 23%) and hospitalisation rate (17% vs 37%) were substantially lower. VE in preventing disease among residents in ACFs was 73% (95% CI 49% to 86). Overall, the included studies were heterogeneous in nature, however, the risk of bias was low to moderate.

Our study reaffirmed the impact of vaccination as a key public health measure to minimise the burden of COVID-19 in ACFs. Facilities with higher crowding indexes should be prioritised for vaccination and should advocate for higher vaccination targets among staff and residents as a critical intervention strategy to minimise disease burden in this vulnerable population.

Glial brain tumours are highly mortal and are noted as major neurosurgical challenges due to frequent recurrence or progression. Despite standard-of-care treatment for gliomas, the prognosis of patients with higher-grade glial tumours is still poor, and hence empowering antitumour immunity against glioma is a potential future oncological prospect. This review is designed to improve our understanding of the efficacy of cell-based immunotherapies for glioma.

This systematic review will be performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search of main electronic databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ISI Web of Science EMBASE and ProQuest will be done on original articles, followed by a manual review of review articles. Only records in English and only clinical trials will be encountered for full-text review. All the appropriate studies that encountered the inclusion criteria will be screened, selected and then will undergo data extraction step by two independent authors. For meta-analyses, data heterogeneity for each parameter will be first evaluated by Cochran’s Q and I2 statistics. In case of possible heterogeneity, a random-effects meta-analysis will be performed and for homogenous data, fixed-effects models will be selected for reporting the results of the proportional meta-analysis. Bias risk will be assessed through Begg’s and Egger’s tests and will also be visualised by Funnel plots.

As this study will be a systematic review without human participants’ involvement, no ethical registration is required and meta-analysis will be presented at a peer-reviewed journal.

CRD42022373297