Pregnancy and the postpartum period are increasingly recognised as sensitive windows for cardiometabolic disease risk. Growing evidence suggests environmental exposures, including endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), are associated with an increased risk of pregnancy complications that are associated with long-term cardiometabolic risk. However, the impact of perinatal EDC exposure on subsequent cardiometabolic risk post-pregnancy is less understood. The Environmental Reproductive and Glucose Outcomes (ERGO) Study was established to investigate the associations of environmental exposures during the perinatal period with post-pregnancy parental cardiometabolic health.

Pregnant individuals aged ≥18 years without pre-existing diabetes were recruited at

We enrolled 653 unique pregnancies and retained 633 through delivery. Participants had a mean age of 33 years, 10% (n=61) developed gestational diabetes and 8% (n=50) developed pre-eclampsia. Participant pregnancy and postpartum urinary phthalate metabolite concentrations and postpartum glycaemic biomarkers were quantified. To date, studies within ERGO found higher exposure to phthalates and phthalate mixtures, and separately, higher exposure to radioactive ambient particulate matter, were associated with adverse gestational glycaemic outcomes. Additionally, certain personal care products used in pregnancy, notably hair oils, were associated with higher urinary phthalate metabolite concentrations, earlier gestational age at delivery and lower birth weight.

Future work will leverage the longitudinal data collected on pregnancy and cardiometabolic outcomes, environmental exposures, questionnaires, banked biospecimens and paediatric data within the ERGO Study.

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused global devastations in the social, economic and health systems of every nation, but disproportionately the nations in Africa. Apart from its grave effects on the global systems, is the persistence of post-COVID-19 condition in individuals infected with the virus. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to collate and summarise the existing research evidence about the prevalence and health effects of post-COVID-19 infection conditions in Africa.

Five main databases will be thoroughly searched from 1 September 2023 to 30 April 2024, for eligible articles based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These databases include PubMed, Central, Scopus, Dimensions AI and JSTOR. Meanwhile, Arksey and O’Malley guidelines will guide this scoping review using article published between 1 January 2020 and 30 April 2024. This review will provide a useful insight into the prevalence of the post-COVID-19 symptoms and their health effects within the population in Africa. The results and findings of the review will be valuable for health system interventions, including restructuring and reorientation of health systems in the continent.

This scoping review will involve analysis of secondary data, therefore, no ethical approval is needed. Dissemination of the results will be done through international journals and available research conferences.

Current choice models in healthcare (and beyond) can provide suboptimal predictions of healthcare users’ decisions. One reason for such inaccuracy is that standard microeconomic theory assumes that decisions of healthcare users are made in a social vacuum. Healthcare choices, however, can in fact be (entirely) socially determined. To achieve more accurate choice predictions within healthcare and therefore better policy decisions, the social influences that affect healthcare user decision-making need to be identified and explicitly integrated into choice models. The purpose of this study is to develop a socially interdependent choice framework of healthcare user decision-making.

A mixed-methods approach will be used. A systematic literature review will be conducted that identifies the social influences on healthcare user decision-making. Based on the outcomes of a systematic literature review, an interview guide will be developed that assesses which, and how, social influences affect healthcare user decision-making in four different medical fields. This guide will be used during two exploratory focus groups to assess the engagement of participants and clarity of questions and probes. The refined interview guide will be used to conduct the semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals and users. These interviews will explore in detail which, and how, social influences affect healthcare user decision-making. Focus group and interview transcripts will be analysed iteratively using a constant comparative approach based on a mix of inductive and deductive coding. Based on the outcomes, a social influence independent choice framework for healthcare user decision-making will be drafted. Finally, the Delphi technique will be employed to achieve consensus about the final version of this choice framework.

This study was approved by the Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management Research Ethics Review Committee (ESHPM, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; reference ETH2122-0666).

The aim of this multicentre COVID-PREDICT study (a nationwide observational cohort study that aims to better understand clinical course of COVID-19 and to predict which COVID-19 patients should receive which treatment and which type of care) was to determine the association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, complications and discharge destination in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

Data from a historical cohort study in eight hospitals (both academic and non-academic) in the Netherlands between January 2020 and July 2021 were used in this study.

3064 hospitalised COVID-19 patients >18 years old.

The primary outcome was the incidence of new-onset AF during hospitalisation. Secondary outcomes were the association between new-onset AF (vs prevalent or non-AF) and mortality, ICU admissions, complications and discharge destination, performed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

Of the 3064 included patients (60.6% men, median age: 65 years, IQR 55–75 years), 72 (2.3%) patients had prevalent AF and 164 (5.4%) patients developed new-onset AF during hospitalisation. Compared with patients without AF, patients with new-onset AF had a higher incidence of death (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.71, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.59) an ICU admission (aOR 5.45, 95% CI 3.90 to 7.61). Mortality was non-significantly different between patients with prevalent AF and those with new-onset AF (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.76). However, new-onset AF was associated with a higher incidence of ICU admission and complications compared with prevalent AF (OR 6.34, 95% CI 2.95 to 13.63, OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.67 to 5.55, respectively).

New-onset AF was associated with an increased incidence of death, ICU admission, complications and a lower chance to be discharged home. These effects were far less pronounced in patients with prevalent AF. Therefore, new-onset AF seems to represent a marker of disease severity, rather than a cause of adverse outcomes.