Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is an urgent public health challenge in Namibia, with profound socioeconomic consequences. The high burden of both tuberculosis and HIV complicates treatment and underscores the need for optimised drug therapies. Precision medicine, which leverages patient-specific genetic and molecular information, offers promise for improving MDR-TB outcomes. However, its effective application relies on population-specific data, particularly understanding how individuals metabolise tuberculosis drugs and how genetic diversity drives variability in treatment response. Currently, no pharmacokinetic (PK) or pharmacogenetic (PG) data on TB treatment exist for Namibian populations. This gap is particularly concerning, given the country’s genetic diversity, environmental factors and comorbidities that may uniquely influence drug metabolism. This study aims to generate PK and PG data to inform dose optimisation and support personalised treatment strategies for MDR-TB in Namibia. The findings will contribute to improved patient care and inform health system strengthening based on locally relevant evidence.

This cross-sectional study will consist of 100 Namibian participants with matched human DNA and PK data of MDR-TB cases receiving isoniazid, clofazimine, bedaquiline and the fluoroquinolones (levofloxacin or moxifloxacin). PK sampling will be divided as follows: 30 individuals will undergo intensive PK sampling, while the remaining (n=70) will undergo sparse PK sampling. DNA will be extracted at Stellenbosch University (SU), and samples will be genotyped using the H3Africa microarray. Sequences will be aligned to the human reference genome, hg38 (GRCh38p13), using the freely available Burrows-Wheeler Aligner. A subset of the samples (n=20–30) will undergo whole genome sequencing (WGS) to verify imputation results and identify novel genetic variants potentially affecting PK in this population.

Quality control and variant call format file generation will be performed using the Genome Analysis Toolkit best practices (V.3.5). Intensive and sparse PK data will be pooled for the development of a population PK (popPK) model using a non-linear mixed-effects modelling approach. The popPK model will characterise the relationship between TB drug dose and exposure, including quantifying covariates, including genetic variation, explaining PK variability, providing a foundation for dose optimisation and personalised treatment strategies.

Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Namibia Human Research Ethics Committee for Health (Ref. SOM18/2024), the Ministry of Health and Social Services (Ref. 22/4/2/3), the SU Health Research Ethics Committee (Ref. N21/11/136) and the University of Cape Town Human Research Ethics Committee (Ref. 500/2022).

Optimising post-operative pain management is crucial for recovery in orthopaedic surgery. Methadone has attracted interest due to its long half-life, N-methyl-D-aspartate -receptor antagonism and potential to reduce post-operative opioid consumption. Existing reviews combine multiple surgical populations, limiting applicability to orthopaedic settings. This protocol outlines a systematic review assessing the analgesic efficacy and safety of peri-operative methadone in adult and adolescent orthopaedic patients.

This review will include randomised controlled trials evaluating intravenous peri-operative methadone vs placebo or standard analgesic regimens in orthopaedic surgery. Primary outcomes are post-operative rescue opioid consumption and pain intensity within 72 hours. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, mobility scores and the length of hospital stay. If available data permit, a methadone dose–response pattern may be investigated. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL, CENTRAL, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov without date restrictions. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data and assess risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials. When appropriate, random-effects meta-analysis methods will be performed. Certainty of evidence will be assessed using Grading of recommendations assesment, development and Evaluation (GRADE).

As this study uses previously published data, ethical approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.

CRD42025616291.

The aim of this study was to develop an educational video introducing an innovative panel survey approach to facilitate guideline panels in making inferences about patient values and preferences.

A user testing of the educational video through one-on-one interviews and iterative refinement of the video through brainstorming meetings.

Interviews and brainstorming meetings were conducted through Zoom.

The participants of the interviews include guideline panellists who had used the panel survey approach, and guideline panellists who had not used the approach but would or would not participate in a panel survey soon. The participants of the brainstorming meetings were a steering committee with expertise in guideline methodology and qualitative research.

The understandability and usefulness of the educational video.

We interviewed 18 guideline panellists from eight different guideline panels, all of whom carefully reviewed the video. Most participants found the video useful in explaining the panel survey approach and its role in incorporating patient values and preferences. Participants suggested improvements, including clarifying key concepts and using plain language instead of technical terminology to make the content more accessible. The major change the steering committee decided to make through brainstorming meetings was to add clarification, refine the wording and replace some text with animation.

User testing resulted in an improved educational video that is more useful and understandable for guideline panellists. Wider implementation of this resource has the potential to enhance the incorporation of patient values and preferences in guideline recommendations, supporting more patient-centred decision-making.

The number of people living with obesity is increasing rapidly worldwide, and the WHO estimates approximately 5 million deaths yearly from non-communicable diseases related to elevated body mass index (BMI). The most effective treatment for weight loss is bariatric surgery, but due to the associated risks and the need for lifelong care, this is not a viable treatment for every patient. With the advent of gut-hormone-based medications to treat obesity, the effectiveness of non-surgical treatment is approaching that of surgical interventions. We therefore aim to investigate the beneficial and harmful effects of laparoscopic bariatric surgery versus any non-surgical treatment.

We will conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis applying our eight-step procedure to assess thresholds for clinical significance and trial sequential analysis to mitigate the risk of random errors. To identify relevant trials, we will search for both published and unpublished trials, without any language restriction, in major medical databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, SCI-EXPANDED and CPCI-S) and trial registries. The date range covered by the search is from database inception until final search date—within 3 months prior to submission of final results manuscript. Two review authors will independently screen references, extract data and perform risk-of-bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations. We will include randomised clinical trials comparing laparoscopic surgery currently in use with any non-surgical comparator in adults or adolescents with BMI >30 kg/m². Quasi-randomised studies or non-randomised studies will not be included. Our critical outcomes are all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and quality of life, and our important outcomes are major cardiovascular events, weight at follow-up, physical function and glycaemic control. In addition, we have two explorative outcomes: metabolic syndrome or Z-score and reported incident of alcohol abuse or other addictive disorder or self-inflicted harm.

This review will collect and perform secondary analysis of data from publicly available sources and ethical approval is therefore not required. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant scientific conferences. We will strive to publish with open access. Awareness will be made through social media platforms. This review aims to help clinicians in identifying best practices in the wide-spanning field of obesity treatment.

CRD420251135341.

To develop and validate the Internalised Stigma Scale for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (ISS-GDM), a questionnaire measuring self-reported internalised stigma among women with prior gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We hypothesised that internalised GDM stigma could be reliably and validly assessed through a short psychometric instrument.

Cross-sectional validation study.

Follow-up data from the Danish, multicentre Face-it trial for women with prior GDM and their families.

In total, 248 women completed the ISS-GDM approximately 1 year after their GDM affected pregnancy.

The primary outcome was psychometric properties of the ISS-GDM, assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis (RA). Secondary outcomes included identification of item anomalies (local response dependence, differential item functioning).

A large proportion of respondents endorsed statements reflecting self-disappointment, self-blame and an altered self-perception. Less endorsed statements included feeling inferior to other mothers or guilt towards family members due to GDM. The ISS-GDM demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties. CFA indicated that item 2 assessing self-perceived capabilities as a mother did not load onto the main factor, while CFA and RA identified local response dependence and differential item functioning by body mass index. After adjustments, a two-factor solution supported calculating a sum score of items 1 and 3–11, with item 2 retained as a stand-alone indicator of perceived parenting capabilities. The 10-item scale demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha=0.78).

The ISS-GDM is a reliable and valid tool for assessing internalised stigma among women with prior GDM. Our findings further suggest that a substantial proportion of women with prior GDM experience self-blame and an altered self-perception due to their diagnosis. The ISS-GDM scale enables research into its prevalence, severity and consequences.

Cardiovascular diseases, overweight, type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease increase the risk of cardiovascular events.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues are recommended by the European Society of Cardiology and the American College of Cardiology to lower the risk of death and progression of cardiovascular disease in patients with cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. Semaglutide, tirzepatide and liraglutide are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and overweight. CagriSema is currently not approved, but several phase III trials are ongoing.

No previous systematic review has investigated the effects of semaglutide, tirzepatide, CagriSema and liraglutide, which may not be disease-specific, on hard binary outcomes for all trial populations at increased risk of cardiovascular events.

We will conduct a systematic review and search major medical databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index—Science) and clinical trial registries from their inception and onwards to identify relevant randomised trials. We expect to perform the literature search in December 2025. Two review authors will independently extract data and assess the risk of bias. We will include randomised trials assessing the effects of semaglutide, tirzepatide, CagriSema and/or liraglutide in participants with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will be myocardial infarction, stroke and all-cause hospitalisation. Data will be synthesised by aggregate data meta-analyses, Trial Sequential Analyses and network meta-analysis, risk of bias will be assessed with Cochrane Risk of Bias tool V. 2, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis approach.

This protocol does not present any results. Findings of this systematic review will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

CRD42024623312.

Current pharmacological treatment options for painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) often fail to provide adequate pain relief. However, in the recent SENZA-PDN study, high-frequency 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation (SCS) demonstrated significant long-term improvements in lower limb pain and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a PDN population. Furthermore, more than half of 10 kHz SCS recipients showed improved sensory function based on non-blinded clinical assessments in post hoc analysis. We report the design of the PDN-Sensory study, which aims to evaluate changes in pain and neurological function with 10 kHz SCS in the treatment of PDN. The study will include objective measures of neurological function, including the modified Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (mTCNS) and intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD).

This multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial will compare conventional medical management (CMM) with 10 kHz SCS+CMM in individuals with diabetes and chronic, intractable lower limb pain due to PDN. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to CMM alone or 10 kHz SCS+CMM, with optional crossover at 6 months. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants at 6 months achieving ≥50% pain relief from baseline. The key secondary endpoint is the proportion of participants at 6 months with a reduction in mTCNS of ≥3 points from baseline (excluding changes in foot pain). Additional endpoints at 6 and 12 months include changes from baseline in mTCNS, IENFD, 7-day averaged pain score, pain-related interference, HRQoL, sleep, psychological outcomes, functional status and metabolic parameters.

The study protocol received central approval from the Western Institutional Review Board (IRB #20230954). Local IRB approval will be required before initiation of the study at each participating clinical site. The study complies with Good Clinical Practice guidelines (ISO 14155), the Declaration of Helsinki, and all applicable national, federal and local regulatory requirements. Dissemination plans include presentations at national and international conferences and publication in a peer-reviewed journal with open access.

NCT05777317.

Data quality in epidemiological studies is a basic requirement for good scientific research. The aim of this study was to examine an important indicator of data quality, data completeness, by investigating predictors of missing data.

Baseline data of a cohort study, the population-based Hamburg City Health Study, were used. Missingness was investigated at the levels of a whole research unit, on the two segments of health service utilisation and psychosocial variables, and two sensitive items (income and number of sexual partners). Predictors for missingness were sociodemographic variables, cognitive abilities and the mode of data collection. Associations were estimated using binary and multinomial logistic regression models.

Of 10 000 participants (mean age=62.4 years; 51.1% women), 32.9% had complete data at the unit level, 66.8% had partially missing data and 0.3% missed all items. The highest proportions of missing values were found for income (27.8%) and the number of sexual partners (36.7%). At both the unit, segment and item level, older age, female sex, low education, a foreign mother language and cognitive impairment were significant predictors for missingness.

For analysing population-based data, dealing with missingness is equally important at all levels of analysis. During the design and conduct of the study, the identified groups may be targeted to reach higher levels of data completeness.

Many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) claim to use Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, but its implementation varies. This suggests that CPG developers, methodologists and users would benefit from an instrument to evaluate the extent to which CPGs adhere to GRADE approach. Such a structured instrument is currently unavailable. Accordingly, this study will develop an evaluation instrument for assessing guideline adherence to the GRADE approach, which we have named ‘GRADE-Check’. The goal is to target items to which CPGs fail to adhere and that potentially have serious consequences resulting in inaccuracies in certainty of evidence and inappropriate direction or strength of recommendations, thereby discriminating across CPGs in issues of importance.

The panel will include up to 25 individuals with specific knowledge and expertise, including experienced authors, educators and methodologists on CPGs methodology and GRADE approach from relevant organisations. The instrument will focus on the key elements of GRADE, aiming for clarity for GRADE experts and non-GRADE experts to apply. The development process for GRADE-Check will consist of the following five phases: (1) recruitment of a panel of GRADE experts; (2) development of objectives and scope for the development of GRADE-Check and criteria for item selection; (3) generation of candidate items through a literature review and panel consultation; (4) panellist discussion to construct the initial draft and extended explanation manual and (5) user testing.

This study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University (no. (2025047K)). Our research findings will be published in peer-reviewed journal articles and presented at academic conferences. Additionally, the dissemination plan will include considerations for the development of implementation manuals, a dedicated project website and training tools.

Parkinson’s disease is a neurological disease with a rising incidence and prevalence. Patients with Parkinson’s disease may receive antipsychotics, for example, due to Parkinson’s disease psychosis. Parkinson’s disease psychosis is characterised by visual hallucinations and other psychotic symptoms. To date, no systematic review has evaluated the effects of antipsychotics in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Therefore, this review aims to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of antipsychotics for Parkinson’s disease.

This is a protocol for a systematic review. A search specialist will perform a search in major medical databases (eg, MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials)) and clinical trial registries. Published and unpublished randomised clinical trials comparing antipsychotics to any control (placebo, standard care or other antipsychotics) in patients with Parkinson’s disease will be included. Two review authors will independently extract data and conduct risk of bias assessments with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool—V.2. Primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and significant falls. Secondary outcomes will be hospitalisations, non-serious adverse events, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale total score and psychotic symptoms using any valid symptom scale. Data will be synthesised by aggregate meta-analysis, trial sequential analysis and network meta-analysis. Several subgroup analyses are planned. An eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations) and CiNeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) approach.

This protocol does not include results, and ethics approval is not required for the project. The findings from the systematic review will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

PROSPERO ID: CRD42025633985. Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025633985.

To increase the sustainability of healthcare, clinical trials must assess the environmental impact of interventions alongside clinical outcomes. This should be guided by Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extensions, which will be developed by The Implementing Climate and Environmental Outcomes in Trials Group. The objective of the scoping review is to describe the existing methods for reporting and measuring environmental outcomes in randomised trials. The results will be used to inform the future development of the SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions on environmental outcomes (SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE).

This protocol outlines the methodology for a scoping review, which will be conducted in two distinct sections: (1) identifying any existing guidelines, reviews or methodological studies describing environmental impacts of interventions and (2) identifying how environmental outcomes are reported in randomised trial protocols and trial results. A search specialist will search major medical databases, reference lists of trial publications and clinical trial registries to identify relevant publications. Data from the included studies will be extracted independently by two review authors. Based on the results, a preliminary list of items for the SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions will be developed.

This study does not include any human participants, and ethics approval is not required according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The findings from the scoping review will be published in international peer-reviewed journals, and the findings will be used to inform the design of a Delphi survey of relevant stakeholders.

Registered with Open Science 28 of February 2025.

The WHO has declared climate change the defining public health challenge of the 21st century. Incorporating climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials is essential for enhancing healthcare treatments’ sustainability and safeguarding global health. To implement such outcomes, it is necessary to establish a framework for unbiased and transparent planning and reporting. We aim to develop extensions to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT 2025) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT 2025) statements by introducing guidelines for reporting climate and environmental outcomes.

This is a protocol for SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions on reporting climate and environmental outcomes in randomised trials termed SPIRIT-Implementing Climate and Environmental (ICE) and CONSORT-ICE. The development of the extensions will consist of five phases: phase 1—project launch, phase 2—review of the literature, phase 3—Delphi survey, phase 4—consensus meeting and phase 5—dissemination and implementation. The phases are expected to overlap. The SPIRIT-ICE and CONSORT-ICE extensions will be developed in parallel. The extensions will guide researchers on how and what to report when assessing climate and environmental outcomes.

The protocol was submitted to the Danish Research Ethics Committees, Denmark in June 2025. Ethics approval is expected in September 2025. The SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.

Fathers of preterm infants wish to be actively involved and attentive in caring for their children. The positive impacts of paternal caregiving on preterm infants’ cognitive and social development have been recognised. Awareness of the need to support fathers during early parenthood is increasing, but fathers may feel excluded when their infants are in the neonatal intensive care unit. Here, we present the protocol for a study involving the development and national implementation of a complex intervention supporting first-time fathers of preterm infants in early parenthood.

The study adheres to the Medical Research Council framework for complex interventions. A multicentre, prospective, non-blinded, quasi-experimental design will be applied to evaluate the effect of a clinical and technology-based intervention targeting both nurses and the fathers. Outcomes from participants enrolled during the control (2023–2024) and intervention (2025–2026) periods, comprising 295 fathers and their partners, will be compared. Effects on parental confidence, stress, depression and mood and family and reflective functioning as well as infants’ emotional and social development will be assessed. A comprehensive process evaluation will be applied using both qualitative and quantitative methods.

The study has been registered at Clinicaltrials.org [no. NCT0 6 116 747 (The SUPPORTED study – First-time Fathers of Preterm Infants), approved on 3 November 2023]. The Danish Data Protection Agency has approved the study (P-2022–792). The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

NCT06116747.

Given that low retention rates are a prevalent challenge in clinical trials, which ultimately affects trial validity, it is recommended that interventions be developed and evaluated to increase trial retention. In the context of trial retention, incorporating behavioural science is endorsed, as it provides a theoretical foundation for considering human behaviour. We hypothesised that an intervention informed by self-determination theory could increase retention in a randomised allergy trial on intralymphatic immunotherapy, as the support of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness is anticipated to lead to more sustained engagement and better outcomes.

To assess the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and evaluation design, following the complex intervention framework by the Medical Research Council, before proceeding to a randomised evaluation.

A parallel two-arm randomised feasibility study was conducted within the randomised allergy trial.

All participants at one Danish site were eligible for recruitment.

The intervention was a web app informed by self-determination theory to support the basic psychological needs through its thoughtfully designed features. Participants were allocated unblinded across treatment groups to complete daily online questionnaires over a 100-day period from May to August 2022. All participants received a daily text message with a link for the questionnaires. On completion, participants in the control group received a confirmation message, while participants in the intervention group had a browser with the menu of the web app opened for them. The features within the menu were voluntary to use.

The prespecified assessments included evaluating the recruitment rate, retention rate (which reflected both sustained participation and the proportion of completed daily questionnaire entries), the suitability of outcome measures and the acceptability of the intervention and evaluation design to both participants and staff. Qualitative data were collected through a collaborative learning process with participants from the intervention group in November 2022.

A total of 30 participants were invited, randomly assigned 1:1 and analysed, resulting in a recruitment rate of 100%. None were lost to follow-up as all remained in the study for the entire duration. The response rate was 84.5% in the intervention group and 79.1% in the control group, indicating satisfactory retention. Outcome measures were deemed appropriate. No unintended adverse events were identified. The collaborative learning meetings involved three participants in the first meeting and two in the second, comprising a total of five different individuals. Participants found the intervention acceptable. They used it differently but agreed that its components were useful. Technical issues needed fixing, and voluntary free text boxes and registration of medication dosage should be added.

The intervention and evaluation design were assessed as acceptable and feasible. Technical issues were fixed, and additional response options were added before a randomised evaluation.

ILIT.NU: EudraCT 2020-001060-28. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05191186.