To detail the development of the Canadian National Questionnaire on Overdose Monitoring (CNQOM), a questionnaire aimed at assessing the perspectives of key stakeholders towards elements of overdose prevention interventions—supervised consumption sites (SCSs) and overdose hotlines and applications (ORHAs).

Cross-sectional survey.

Canadian health system.

English or French speaking adults from four key informant groups: people who use substances (PWUS), health professionals, emergency responders and the general public.

Test–retest reliability of CNQOM items.

A novel questionnaire was developed. Item development followed a standard approach, with face validity verified by representatives from the four informant groups. Input from experts in harm reduction and addiction medicine enhanced content and face validity of the questionnaire. A rigorous response validation approach was undertaken to ensure respondents were human and from Canada. Test–retest reliability items were assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation, Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Cohen’s kappa.

After data cleaning and response validation, 4445 valid responses were obtained from the four key informant groups. Respondents represented a range of sociodemographic backgrounds and housing scenarios from all provinces and territories in Canada. Test–retest reliability was assessed using a small subsample of 142 participants (primarily from general public informants). Questionnaire items demonstrated slight to substantial stability in responses (kappa coefficients: 0.15–0.58; Spearman’s r: 0.08–0.66).

The CNQOM is the first online questionnaire in Canada designed to capture perspectives and attitudes towards specific elements of SCSs and ORHAs among diverse key informant groups. Our questionnaire was administered to a large, geographically diverse sample and designed to capture the perspectives of four key informant groups. Lower than expected test–retest reliability may be explained by lack of participant familiarity with SCS and especially ORHAs and the impersonal nature of the instrument content among some respondents. Future work will elucidate key informant perspectives on these services based on the data.

Each year, millions of people experience recurrent diverticulitis episodes. Elective sigmoid colon resection reduces the risk of recurrence, but The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons recommends individualising surgical decisions based on the impact of the condition on a patient’s quality of life (QoL). However, no threshold for QoL impairment has been established to guide decision-making, and evidence comparing elective colectomy with medical management in terms of QoL limitation is limited. To address these gaps and to guide treatment decision-making, we designed the Comparison of Surgery and Medicine on the Impact of Diverticulitis (COSMID) trial.

The COSMID trial is a large, pragmatic randomised trial including patients with QoL-limiting diverticulitis that aims to determine if partial colectomy is superior to medical management and explore subgroups that are more likely to respond to each treatment.

COSMID will recruit 250 English-speaking and Spanish-speaking adults with imaging-confirmed and QoL-limiting diverticulitis (defined using a modified diverticulitis-related QoL survey). Participants are randomly assigned to undergo elective partial colectomy or receive comprehensive medical management (eg, selected from options including fibre, probiotics, mesalamine and rifaximin). A total of 100 patients who decline randomisation but consent to follow-up will be included in a parallel observational cohort. The primary outcome is the time-averaged score of the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index at 6, 9 and 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include clinical adverse events, healthcare utilisation, recurrent episodes of diverticulitis and additional patient-reported outcomes like the Diverticulitis Quality of Life instrument, decisional regret and work productivity. Exploratory analyses aim to identify differential treatment effects based on patients’ characteristics.

This trial was approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board (IRB) on 26 August 2019 (IRB #191217). Vanderbilt serves as the institutional review board of record for the following study sites: Albany Medical College, Allegheny Health, Atrium Health Carolinas Medical Center, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Boston University Medical Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, UT Health Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital, Medical University of South Carolina, New York-Presbyterian Queens, Stanford University, University of Pennsylvania, University of California San Diego, University of California San Francisco, University of Colorado Denver, University of Florida, University of Iowa, University of Utah, University of Washington Medical Center, University of South Florida, University of Rochester Medical Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Lahey Hospital & Medical Center, Weill Cornell Medical Center and Northwell Health. Rush University Medical Center (approved 8 January 2020), Columbia University Medical Center (approved 28 January 2020), Northwestern University (approved 19 March 2020), Mount Carmel Health System (approved 5 May 2020) and Memorial Health University Medical Center (approved 4 April 2022) are regulated and were approved by their respective IRBs. Results from this trial will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

NCT04095663.

To implement an overview of reviews that discuss the current state of syntheses (such as systematic reviews) of only observational studies on health risk behaviours (HRBs), including smoking, alcohol intake, poor sleep, poor quality diet, common mental health problems (depression and anxiety), and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), while excluding synthesis of clinical trials.

Overview of reviews or umbrella review following Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) guidelines.

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO-PsychArticles and Epistemonikos, searched from January 2013 to 30 June 2025.

We included systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies that assessed the relationship between HRBs—including smoking, alcohol intake, poor sleep, poor quality diet, physical activity and common mental health problems such as depression and anxiety—and HbA1c. Reviews of clinical trials were excluded.

We synthesised systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the above topic from five databases following the PRIOR protocol. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts using standardised methods. Data extracted included study design, exposures, outcomes and population characteristics. Risk of bias was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. Overlap across reviews was evaluated using the corrected covered area metric.

Eight systematic reviews were included in the final synthesis, encompassing a total sample size of around 307 019 individuals. The study highlights a significant paucity of systematic reviews of observational studies in this area, with no reviews on alcohol and exercise. The existing evidence on poor sleep, poor quality diet and smoking points towards these HRBs leading to worse HbA1c. A bidirectional relationship was found between depression and HbA1c.

This umbrella review highlights the significant association between HbA1c and key health risk factors underscoring the importance of observational studies, highlighting their ability to capture real-world conditions and complex interactions. While in agreement with existing study designs, this review provides convergent evidence of the critical role of HRBs in managing HbA1c levels.

Longitudinal studies provide insights into the outcomes of medical training curriculum. However, few educational cohort studies have been conducted in Iran. This study aims first to evaluate the impact of the current curriculum on medical students' medium- and long-term academic and career outcomes and, second, to identify medical students' characteristics and how they change through the doctor of medicine programme.

This protocol outlines a multi-phase, prospective cohort study that will take place in Mashhad, Iran. The study will implement the Kirkpatrick model, investigating medical students' knowledge, skills, behaviour and professionalism development over 10 years. Approximately 1000 medical students will be recruited through peer invitations and social networks. Data will be collected through baseline and follow-up questionnaires, academic performance records and comprehensive test scores throughout the Doctor of Medicine (MD) programme.

The data from the questionnaires will be reported using a Likert scale. Quantitative data will be described using means and SD, while qualitative variables will be presented as frequencies and percentages. We will evaluate the relationship between quantitative variables using correlation coefficients and the relationship between qualitative variables via the ² or Fisher exact test. All tests will be two-sided, with a significance level set as p

All participants will complete written informed consent before data collection. All students can withdraw from the study at any time with no consequences. Results of this study will be presented at relevant conferences and will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences.

IR.MUMS.REC.1400.311.

Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB), despite being a highly costly medication, is considered a cost-effective approach compared with sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) in the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. No study has evaluated the effect of GLE/PIB’s introduction into Iran’s drug list from a health policy perspective and estimated the budgetary impact change. Therefore, this study was conducted to analyse the fiscal effect of the introduction of GLE/PIB into Iran’s drug list.

Budget impact analysis. The assumptions and costs of including GLE/PIB in Iran’s drug list for the treatment of patients with hepatitis C were derived from a conducted cost-effectiveness analysis.

National level. In this study, the budgetary changes in Iran’s pharmaceutical market and health system, from the Ministry of Health’s perspective, have been estimated for a 5-year time horizon following the introduction of GLE/PIB in the country.

Based on the results obtained from the budget impact model, currently, 4112 patients are receiving SOF/DCV and SOF/VEL therapeutic regimens, which is expected to decrease to 1093 in 2029 owing to the affordability of medications and a 50% estimated market share for GLE/PIB. According to the results, with the introduction of GLE/PIB into the market and assuming a market share of 10% in the first year, growing to 50% by the fifth year, the healthcare system costs will increase by approximately $0.61, $1.77, $3.86, $7.45 and $13.51 million over the next 5 years, respectively. Additionally, based on the drug’s selling price, there will be a 468% increase in hepatitis C drug market costs after 5 years, resulting in an overall budget increase of approximately 0.13% for Iran’s pharmaceutical market. According to the sensitivity analysis, a 20% reduction in chronic hepatitis C (CHC) costs could decrease the projected increase in health sector costs from $13.51 million (an 18.84% increase) to $10.52 million (an 18.16% increase). Conversely, a 20% rise in CHC costs would raise those costs to $16.49 million (a 19.31% increase).

Considering the high price of the GLE/PIB compared with the available options in Iran, with the introduction of GLE/PIB into Iran’s drug list, insurance coverage and appropriate allocation of necessary resources, a reduction in the cost burden because of hepatitis C treatment is expected for individuals and households. Additionally, with a well-regulated market share of existing medications, the optimal treatment choice for patients will be feasible.