The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated changes to clinical research methodology, with clinical studies being carried out via online/remote means. This mixed-methods study aimed to identify which digital tools are currently used across all stages of clinical research by stakeholders in clinical, health and social care research and investigate their experience using digital tools.

Two online surveys followed by semistructured interviews were conducted. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

To explore the digital tools used since the pandemic, survey participants (researchers and related staff (n=41), research and development staff (n=25)), needed to have worked on clinical, health or social care research studies over the past 2 years (2020–2022) in an employing organisation based in the West Midlands region of England (due to funding from a regional clinical research network (CRN)). Survey participants had the opportunity to participate in an online qualitative interview to explore their experiences of digital tools in greater depth (n=8).

Six themes were identified in the qualitative interviews: ‘definition of a digital tool in clinical research’; ‘impact of the COVID-19 pandemic’; ‘perceived benefits/drawbacks of digital tools’; ‘selection of a digital tool’; ‘barriers and overcoming barriers’ and ‘future digital tool use’. The context of each theme is discussed, based on the interview results.

Findings demonstrate how digital tools are becoming embedded in clinical research, as well as the breadth of tools used across different research stages. The majority of participants viewed the tools positively, noting their ability to enhance research efficiency. Several considerations were highlighted; concerns about digital exclusion; need for collaboration with digital expertise/clinical staff, research on tool effectiveness and recommendations to aid future tool selection. There is a need for the development of resources to help optimise the selection and use of appropriate digital tools for clinical research staff and participants.

To compare metabolic dysfunction-associated profiles between patients with diabetes who developed different obesity-related site-specific cancers and those who remained free of cancer during follow-up.

Retrospective cohort study.

Public general outpatient clinics in Hong Kong.

Patients with diabetes without a history of malignancy (n=391 921).

The outcomes of interest were diagnosis of site-specific cancers (colon and rectum, liver, pancreas, bladder, kidney and stomach) during follow-up. Cox proportional hazards regression was applied to assess the associations between metabolic dysfunction and other clinical factors with each site-specific cancer.

Each 0.1 increase in waist-to-hip ratio was associated with an 11%–35% elevated risk of colorectal, bladder and liver cancers. Each 1% increase in glycated haemoglobin was linked to a 4%–9% higher risk of liver and pancreatic cancers. While low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides were inversely associated with the risk of liver and pancreatic cancers, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was negatively associated with pancreatic, gastric and kidney cancers, but positively associated with liver cancer. Furthermore, liver cirrhosis was linked to a 56% increased risk of pancreatic cancer. No significant association between hypertension and cancer risk was found.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated profiles contribute to different obesity-related cancer outcomes differentially among patients with diabetes. This study may provide evidence to help identify cancer prevention targets during routine diabetes care.

Early sepsis treatment in the emergency department (ED) is crucial to improve patient survival. Despite international promulgation, the uptake of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) Hour-1 Bundle (lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics, 30 mL/kg crystalloid for hypotension/lactate ≥4 mmol/L and vasopressors for hypotension during/after fluid resuscitation within 1 hour of sepsis recognition) is low across healthcare settings. Delays in sepsis recognition and a lack of high-quality evidence hinder its implementation. We propose a novel sepsis care model (National Early Warning Score, NEWS-1 care), in which the SSC Hour-1 Bundle is triggered objectively by a high NEWS-2 (≥5). This study aims to determine the feasibility of a full-scale type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial on the NEWS-1 care in multiple EDs.

We will conduct a pilot type 1 hybrid trial and prospectively recruit 200 patients from 4 public EDs in Hong Kong cluster randomised in a stepped wedge design over 10 months. All study sites will start with an initial period of standard care and switch in random order at 2-month intervals to the NEWS-1 care unidirectionally. The implementation evaluation will employ mixed methods guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework, which includes qualitative and quantitative data from focus group interviews, staff survey and clinical record reviews. We will analyse the 14 feasibility outcomes as progression criteria to a full-scale trial, including trial acceptability to patients and staff, patient and staff recruitment rates, accuracy of sepsis screening, protocol adherence, accessibility to follow-up data, safety and preliminary clinical impacts of the NEWS1 care, using descriptive statistics.

The institutional review boards of all study sites approved this study. This study will establish the feasibility of a full-scale hybrid trial. We will disseminate the findings through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and educational activities.

NCT05731349.