Implementation of low-intensity, evidence-based psychological interventions can help meet the mental health and psychosocial needs of people with cancer, especially in low-resource settings where there is a dearth of mental health specialists. In this study, we will conduct a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the stress management intervention Self-Help Plus, which has been translated and adapted to Vietnamese, vSH+, among people newly diagnosed with breast or gynaecological cancer in Viet Nam.

At six participating hospitals, individuals diagnosed with breast or gynaecologic cancer within the past year will be recruited, consented and randomised into either enhanced usual care (EUC) or EUC plus the vSH+ intervention, which consists of four sessions each lasting approximately 75 min. Quantitative surveys will be administered at three time points: enrolment/baseline (T0), after 6 weeks (T1) and after 4 months (T2). A qualitative evaluation component, which will include in-depth interviews with patients, implementers and healthcare staff and managers, as well as focus group discussions with caregivers, will assess the acceptability and feasibility of the vSH+ intervention.

Ethical reviews for the study were obtained from Boston University, Hanoi University of Public Health (HUPH) and all the participating hospital sites. On completion of data collection and analyses, the research team will prepare and submit abstracts to scientific conferences as well as manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals. We will also conduct dissemination events to report the trial results to relevant stakeholders.

NCT06398067.

To evaluate the accuracy of the arterial oxygen partial pressure/inspired oxygen fraction (PaO₂/FiO₂) ratio in predicting mortality among acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients in Vietnam.

A retrospective observational study.

A central hospital in Vietnam.

Adult patients diagnosed with ARDS based on the Berlin definition and admitted to Bach Mai Hospital between August 2015 and August 2023. ARDS severity was converted from descriptive categories to the Berlin score, ranging from 1 (PaO₂/FiO₂>300 mm Hg) to 4 (PaO₂/FiO₂≤100 mm Hg).

All-cause hospital mortality.

Of 345 patients, 67.5% were male, and the median age was 55.0 years (IQR: 39.0–66.0). Hospital mortality was 61.2% (211/345). On the first day of admission, the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC): 0.585 (95% CI 0.522 to 0.649)) showed limited predictive ability for hospital mortality. Incorporating the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio into the Berlin score did not substantially improve accuracy (AUROC: 0.578 (95% CI 0.516 to 0.641)). Both measures were less accurate than Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) (AUROC: 0.650 (95% CI 0.590 to 0.711)), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) (AUROC: 0.685 (95% CI 0.628 to 0.742)) and Confusion, Urea >7 mmol/L (20 mg/dL), Respiratory rate ≥30 breaths/min, Blood pressure (systolic 2/FiO₂ values (adjusted OR, AOR: 0.988 (95% CI 0.979 to 0.996)) were independently associated with lower mortality risk, while higher Berlin (AOR: 2.477 (95% CI 1.190 to 5.156)), SOFA (AOR: 1.278 (95% CI 1.102 to 1.482)), APACHE II (AOR: 1.236 (95% CI 1.108 to 1.379)) and CURB-65 (AOR: 7.142 (95% CI 2.581 to 19.763)) scores were associated with increased mortality risk.

In this study of ARDS patients in Vietnam, the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio demonstrated limited discriminatory ability for hospital mortality, and incorporating it into the Berlin score did not meaningfully improve performance. While less accurate than SOFA, APACHE II and CURB-65 scores, the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio and Berlin score remained independently associated with mortality risk. These findings should be interpreted cautiously, given the retrospective design, single-centre setting and potential selection bias; further validation in larger, multicentre studies is warranted.

Documenting evidence on global health strategies and programmes that provide safeguards for vulnerable populations and strengthen overall pandemic preparedness is essential. This study aimed to identify factors associated with adherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures, COVID-19-related symptoms and testing, as well as pandemic-related income loss among internally displaced persons (IDPs) in urban and remote areas of Burkina Faso, Niger and Mali.

This cross-sectional study used fixed-site respondent-driven sampling (RDS).

Primary care settings across six urban and remote locations in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger.

4144 internally displaced adults, who had been forced from their homes within 5 years of the survey, participated in the study. The survey was conducted between August and October 2021 in two selected locations in three countries: Kaya (n=700) and Ouahigouya (n=715) in Burkina Faso; Bamako (n=707) and Ménaka (n=700) in Mali; and Niamey (n=733), and Diffa (n=589) in Niger. Participants were included if they were born in the study countries, displaced due to conflict, violence or disaster, aged 18 years or older, and living or working in the study site for at least 1 month.

The primary outcomes measured were adherence to COVID-19 mitigation measures, presence of COVID-19 symptoms, COVID-19 testing and vaccination rates and pandemic-related income loss.

Among 4144 IDPs surveyed across 6 sites in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, over half (52%) reported experiencing at least one COVID-19 symptom in the preceding 2 weeks. However, 8% had ever been tested for COVID-19, and fewer than 5% had received a vaccine in all sites except Diffa, where 54% reported vaccination. While willingness to be vaccinated was high (ranging from 56.6% in Bamako to 89.5% in Niamey), access remained limited. Compliance with public health measures varied; for example, 41.7% of IDPs were able to maintain physical distance from non-household members, and just 60.2% reported wearing a mask. Chronic health conditions were consistently associated with higher odds of COVID-19 symptoms (Ménaka OR: 14.65; 95% CI: 7.36 to 29.17). Economic vulnerability was widespread, with more than half of IDPs in Bamako (58.1%) and Niamey (66.4%) reporting income loss due to the pandemic, and average monthly income declining by over 50% in most sites. IDPs in urban areas generally reported greater exposure to COVID-19 risk factors, while those in remote settings reported lower adherence and poorer access to basic preventive measures.

This is the first known RDS study to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on IDPs. Findings suggest that IDPs in urban areas may face heightened risks of exposure and infection, underscoring the need to prioritise them in public health efforts. Low testing and vaccination rates and significant income loss call for advocacy and economic relief to address these vulnerabilities. Future pandemic responses should integrate health interventions with targeted support, especially mitigating income loss to bolster IDPs’ resilience.

We report the collaborative views of a group of nurses, midwives and allied health professionals (NMAHPs) in the UK who have a genomics research remit or interest. Our group includes genetic counsellors under this diverse category of healthcare workers.

This group came together as part of the National Institute for Health and Social Care Research (NIHR) Genomics Research National Specialty Group. After responding to a survey to elicit the views of NMAHPs working in genomics, some of the original 45 respondents, along with others who learnt of the project by word of mouth, have worked together to produce this article.

The paper aims to set out in clear terms the value of NMAHPs to research that supports the patient-centred implementation of genomics in the National Health Service (NHS).

We discuss four potential areas where NMAHPs, in particular, can contribute to the research. These are patient perspectives and epistemic justice, psychosocial impacts, the familial nature of genomics and equity. We argue that this group (NMAHPs) represents a potentially underused resource for the NHS as it seeks to ensure that advances in genomics are translated into patient benefit.

We propose that NMAHPs, with our research expertise, are well placed to shape and deliver a research agenda that explores models of patient-centred care in the genomics era. We call for increased funding for NMAHP research roles and funding opportunities to deliver this fundamental work.