To identify the factors associated with low psychological resilience among university students in the Grand Est region of France at the end of the first national COVID-19 lockdown.

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (May 2020) among students at the University of Lorraine using the LimeSurvey platform and institutional mailing lists.

Higher education setting in north-eastern France, involving students from the University of Lorraine (multicampus public university) and Sciences Po Nancy, a political science institute in the same region.

A total of 3708 students fully completed the online questionnaire, including the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), resulting in an estimated response rate of 7.1%. All students enrolled at the University of Lorraine and Sciences Po Nancy during the 2019–2020 academic year were eligible to participate.

The primary outcome was psychological resilience, measured using the BRS. Secondary measures included perceived social support assessed with the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, quality of interpersonal relationships evaluated using the Quality of Interpersonal Relationships Scale (Échelle de la Qualité des Relations Interpersonnelles, EQRI) and frequency of positive and negative thoughts measured with the Thermometer of Thoughts Tool. Factors associated with low resilience were analysed using bivariable and multivariable logistic regression.

Among 3708 students included in the sample, corresponding to a response rate of approximately 7.1%, 50.6% had normal resilience, while 37.3% reported low resilience. Female gender (OR=2.1, 95% CI: 1.8 to 2.6) and low social support (OR=1.7, 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.6) were the factors associated most strongly with low resilience. Negative thoughts (OR=1.4, 95% CI: 1.4 to 1.5), lower quality of relationships with people in general (OR=1.5, 95% CI: 1.3 to 1.8) and studying arts, humanities or languages (OR=1.4, 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.8) were identified as factors associated with low resilience. Increased age (OR=0.9, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.0) and flat sharing (OR=0.6, 95% CI: 0.4 to 0.9) were inversely associated with low resilience levels.

Resilience seems to be impacted primarily by internal and micro-environmental factors. Consolidating levels of individual resilience of at-risk populations by acting on these factors could be the key to improving their mental health.

Maternal and child mortality has markedly decreased worldwide over the past few decades. Despite this success, the decline remains unequal across countries and is overall insufficient to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa bear most of the burden of maternal and child morbidity and mortality. Major gaps persist in our understanding of the causes, timing, diagnostic thresholds and risk factors for adverse outcomes in these regions. Addressing these gaps requires new ways to prevent and treat disease, from novel diagnostics to precision public health strategies, all of which rely on high-quality clinical data from diverse populations. The Pregnancy Risk, Infant Surveillance, and Measurement Alliance (PRISMA) Maternal and Newborn Health Study aims to estimate population-level prevalence of morbidities and mortality and to assess biological, clinical and sociodemographic risk among mother–infant pairs in India, Pakistan, Kenya, Ghana and Zambia.

This study is a prospective, open cohort study with a planned recruitment of about 6000 women annually across six research sites in five countries. Participants are pregnant women enrolled less than 20 weeks gestation, as determined by ultrasound, identified through active house-to-house and facility-based surveillance. Robust clinical data will be collected at 12 scheduled study visits during antenatal care, labour and delivery, and through 1 year postpartum. A total of 34 outcomes will be captured. The primary analysis will estimate the burden of adverse outcomes and examine associated risk factors to inform future intervention strategies. Data will also be used to develop normative values for pregnant and postpartum women, as well as predictive models to assess pregnancy risk.

PRISMA received institutional and national ethical approvals. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed open-access journals and disseminated at national and international forums to inform clinical guidelines and public health practice.

NCT05904145.

Acute low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent condition with various non-surgical treatment options, yet no comprehensive network meta-analysis has systematically compared their relative efficacy for pain and disability. This study aims to fill that gap by synthesising available evidence on the efficacy of different types of non-surgical interventions for acute LBP, such as various medications, manual therapies and education-based therapies. Our coprimary objectives are to (1) compare each active treatment to an inert reference for measures of LBP and related disability and (2) rank the efficacy of treatments.

We will conduct a systematic search across multiple databases, including grey literature, to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating non-surgical treatments for acute LBP. Eligible studies must report on pain and/or disability outcomes in adults. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of evidence will be graded using CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We will use a frequentist network meta-analysis to pool standardised mean differences in pain and disability, employing random-effects models to account for heterogeneity. A qualitative analysis will assess study characteristics and transitivity, while a quantitative analysis will evaluate efficacy and inconsistency. Results will be presented using network geometry, p-scores, forest plots, funnel plots, Egger’s test, Q-statistics and league tables to visualise both direct and indirect evidence and to identify potential biases.

This review protocol does not involve any primary research with human participants, animal subjects or medical record review. Consequently, this work did not require approval from an institutional review board or ethics committee. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conference(s). De-identified data will be made available in a public repository.