Participation in physical activity (PA) is a cornerstone of the secondary prevention of stroke. Given the heterogeneous nature of stroke, PA interventions that are adaptive to individual performance capability and associated co-morbidity levels are recommended. Mobile health (mHealth) has been identified as a potential approach to supporting PA post-stroke. To this end, we used a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomised Trial design to develop an adaptive, mHealth intervention to improve PA post-stroke – The Adaptive Physical Activity programme in Stroke (TAPAS) (Clinicaltrials.Gov NCT05606770). As the first trial in stroke recovery literature to use this design, there is an opportunity to conduct a process evaluation for this type of adaptive intervention. The aim of this process evaluation is to examine the implementation process, mechanism of change and contextual influences of TAPAS among ambulatory people with stroke in the community.

Guided by the Medical Research Council Framework for process evaluations, qualitative and quantitative methods will be used to examine the (1) implementation process and the content of TAPAS (fidelity adaptation, dose and reach); (2) mechanisms of change (participants’ response to the intervention; mediators; unexpected pathways and consequences) and (3) influence of the context of the intervention. Quantitative data will be presented descriptively, for example, adherence to exercise sessions. Qualitative data will be collected among TAPAS participants and the interventionist using semi-structured one-to-one or focus group interviews. Transcribed interviews will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Key themes and sub-themes will be developed.

Ethical approval has been granted by the Health Service Executive Mid-Western Ethics Committee (REC Ref: 026/2022) (25/03/2024). The findings will be submitted for publication and presented at relevant national and international academic conferences.

The evidence for the optimal duration of psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder (BPD) is scarce. Two previous trials have compared different durations of psychotherapy. The first compared 6 months versus 12 months of dialectical behaviour therapy for BPD (the FASTER trial). The second compared 5 months versus 14 months of mentalisation-based therapy for BPD (the MBT-RCT trial). The primary objective of the present study will be to provide an individual patient data pooled analysis of two randomised clinical trials by combining the two short-term groups and the two long-term groups from the FASTER and MBT-RCT trials, thereby providing greater statistical power than the individual trials. Accordingly, we will evaluate the overall evidence on the effects of short-term versus long-term psychotherapy for BPD and investigate whether certain subgroups might benefit from short-term versus long-term psychotherapy.

An individual patient data pooled analysis of the FASTER trial and the MBT-RCT trial will be conducted. The primary outcome will be a composite of the proportion of participants with a suicide, a suicide attempt or a psychiatric hospitalisation. The secondary outcome will be the proportion of participants with self-harm. Exploratory outcomes will be BPD symptoms, symptom distress, level of functioning and quality of life. We will primarily assess outcomes at 15 months after randomisation for the FASTER trial and at 16 months after randomisation for the MBT-RCT trial. Predefined subgroups based on the design variables in the original trials will be tested for interaction with the intervention as follows: trial, sex (male compared with female), age (below or at 30 years compared with above 30 years) and baseline level of functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning baseline score at 0–49 compared with 50–100).

The statistical analyses will be performed on anonymised trial data that have already been approved by the respective ethical committees that originally assessed the included trials. The final analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and the results will be presented at national seminars and international conferences.

CRD42024612840.

To investigate the relationship between demographic characteristics and extracurricular achievements among UK medical students.

National, cross-sectional survey.

All 44 UK medical schools recognised by the General Medical Council.

8,395 medical students.

Binary indicators of extracurricular engagement, including PubMed-indexed authorship, academic presentations, quality improvement projects, leadership roles and academic prizes. Logistic regression models were used to explore associations with demographic and extracurricular achievement predictors.

Logistic regression analysis showed that students from private schools (OR 1.35, CI 1.20 to 1.53, p

Significant disparities in extracurricular achievement exist among UK medical students, principally associated with gender, private schooling and familial links to medicine. Apparent ethnic differences were largely attenuated after adjustment for other variables, indicating socioeconomic factors as stronger predictors of engagement. Given the role of these achievements in postgraduate selection, targeted interventions by medical schools and professional bodies to widen access to funding, mentorship and structured guidance for all students, regardless of perceived advantage, may support equitable opportunity without undermining merit-based standards.

To explore factors influencing UK medical students’ specialty choices and examine variations in these influences across demographic groups and stages of training.

National, cross-sectional online survey.

All 44 UK medical schools recognised by the General Medical Council.

8,395 medical students.

The primary outcome was the specialty preferences of UK medical students. The secondary outcomes were factors behind these preferences and how these factors vary across demographic groups and different stages of training.

General Practice (15.3%), Paediatrics (10.6%) and Anaesthetics (9.9%) were the most preferred specialties among final-year students. Work-life balance (84.1%), compatibility with family life (78.2%), positive training experiences (85.2%) and future specialty outlook (74.9%) were key factors influencing specialty choice. Only 23.1% of students felt confident about securing a specialty training post, with confidence higher among males (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.52, p

This study highlights disparities in specialty preferences and influencing factors among UK medical students. A focus on improving career guidance, exposure to various specialties and supporting equitable access to training opportunities is essential for fostering a motivated and sustainable medical workforce.

To develop a core outcome set (COS) to capture and measure the well-being of doctors working in the National Health Service (NHS).

An online Delphi study.

UK NHS.

Participants from four stakeholder groups: (1) those who might use the COS in research, (2) organisations that measure/capture NHS staff well-being, (3) professionals with experience managing NHS staff well-being and (4) NHS doctors were identified through authorship of relevant publications, attendee lists of doctor well-being conferences and meetings, professional bodies, participation in a previous study and recommendations from others. They were recruited via email.

A two-stage process: (1) creating a list of 43 well-being outcomes informed by a systematic review of well-being measurement instruments, a survey of UK doctors and two doctor engagement workshops and (2) an online Delphi study (with two rounds) to reach consensus. Outcomes were rated on a 9-point Likert scale; ‘consensus’ was reached when ≥75% agreed that an outcome was critical for inclusion in the COS.

52 participants completed both Delphi rounds. Seven well-being outcomes met the threshold for inclusion in the COS: general well-being, health, personal safety, job satisfaction, morale, life work balance and good clinical practice.

Use of the COS has the potential to reduce heterogeneity and standardise the capture and measurement of doctor well-being, and ensure outcomes important to all stakeholders are reported.

This study was prospectively registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trial initiative at www.comet-initiative.org (Registration: 1577).

To investigate how doctors and self-managing older patients with heart failure (HF) discuss the patients’ potential or ongoing medication adherence problems, and how such discussions evolve as patients transition from hospital to home, with particular focus on: (1) doctors’ communicative actions aimed at addressing patient disclosures of adherence problems and (2) patients’ feedback indicating whether their doctor’s supportive actions were acceptable to them.

Exploratory interaction-based observational cohort study. Inductive microanalysis of authentic patient–doctor consultations, audio recorded for each patient at: (1) first ward visit in hospital, (2) discharge visit from hospital and (3) follow-up visit with general practitioner (GP).

Hospital and primary care, Norway (2022–2023).

25 patients with HF (+65 years) and their attending doctors (23 hospital doctors, 25 GPs).

Analysis of 74 consultations revealed that 25 HF patients disclosed 23 practical adherence problems indicating risks of unintentional non-adherence (eg, limited resources to manage medications) and 39 perceptual problems indicating risks of intentional non-adherence (eg, worries, negative experience or stance). Doctors addressed 79% of patients’ disclosures by: (1) exploring the scope of the problem or (2) providing supportive actions to improve patients’ ability or motivation to adhere. We calculated nearly five times higher odds for doctors to address patients’ practical problems to their perceptual problems (OR 4.79, 95% CI 1.25 to 25.83). Unresolved problems included: (1) doctors addressed patients’ disclosures, but patients signalled the supportive actions were unsuitable (37%) and (2) doctors left disclosures unaddressed (21%).

In this explorative study, the doctors were more likely to address the patients’ adherence problems associated with unintentional non-adherence risks than those associated with intentional non-adherence risks. Even when doctors attempted to address HF patients’ medication adherence problems, half of the problems remained unresolved, usually because patients indicated that the doctor’s suggestion to improve their situation was against their preference.