Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a global public health crisis impacting low-income and middle-income countries such as Bangladesh. While self-management is encouraged for individuals with T2DM, there is a significant lack of knowledge regarding the factors of facilitators, barriers and expectations associated with T2DM self-management in Bangladesh. This research aims to investigate the potential elements that support, impede and are anticipated in the effective practice of self-management for T2DM in rural areas of Bangladesh.

This study will use an exploratory qualitative approach. 16 focus group discussions, 13 in-depth interviews and 9 key informant interviews will be conducted among multilevel stakeholders, including people with T2DM, their caregivers, healthcare providers, health managers/administrators and policy planners. Interviews will be audio-recorded, transcribed, translated and analysed using thematic analysis.

This research project has been approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (project reference number: 39483) and the Ethical Review Committee of the Centre for Injury Prevention and Research, Bangladesh (Memo: CIPRB/ERC/2023/14). Research findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. Published reports will include group data. Individual data privacy will be strictly maintained.

Opioid overdoses in the USA have increased to unprecedented levels. Administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone can prevent overdoses.

This study was conducted to reveal the pharmacoepidemiologic patterns in naloxone prescribing to Medicaid patients from 2018 to 2021 as well as Medicare in 2019.

Observational pharmacoepidemiologic study

US Medicare and Medicaid naloxone claims

The Medicaid State Drug Utilisation Data File was utilised to extract information on the number of prescriptions and the amount prescribed of naloxone at a national and state level. The Medicare Provider Utilisation and Payment was also utilised to analyse prescription data from 2019.

States with naloxone prescription rates that were outliers of quartile analysis were noted.

The number of generic naloxone prescriptions per 100 000 Medicaid enrollees decreased by 5.3%, whereas brand naloxone prescriptions increased by 245.1% from 2018 to 2021. There was a 33.1-fold difference in prescriptions between the highest (New Mexico=1809.5) and lowest (South Dakota=54.6) states in 2019. Medicare saw a 30.4-fold difference in prescriptions between the highest (New Mexico) and lowest states (also South Dakota) after correcting per 100 000 enrollees.

This pronounced increase in the number of naloxone prescriptions to Medicaid patients from 2018 to 2021 indicates a national response to this widespread public health emergency. Further research into the origins of the pronounced state-level disparities is warranted.

In Canada, Métis people are one of three distinct Indigenous peoples whose rights are recognised and affirmed in Section 35 of the federal Constitution Act, 1982. In line with Métis people having a unique culture, history, language and way of life, a distinctions-based approach is critical to understand the current landscape of Métis-specific health. In this paper, we present a scoping review protocol to describe this research landscape in Canada led by the Métis Nation of Ontario (MNO).

This scoping review protocol is reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews reporting guidelines and follows Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology. We will search electronic databases (Scopus, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Anthropology Plus, Bibliography of Indigenous Peoples of North America, Canadian Business and Current Affairs, Indigenous Studies Portal, Informit Indigenous Collection, Collaborative Indigenous Garden, PubMed, ProQuest), grey literature sources and reference lists from selected papers. Two reviewers (HMB and SK) will double-blind screen all titles/abstracts and full-text studies for inclusion. Any health-related study or health report that includes a Métis-specific health, well-being or Métis social determinant of health outcome will be included. Relevant variables will be extracted following an iterative process whereby the data charting will be reviewed and updated.

Findings from this scoping review will be shared back through the MNO’s existing community-based communication channels. Traditional academic dissemination will also be pursued. Research ethics board approval is not required, since data are from peer-reviewed publications or publicly shared health reports and knowledge translation products.

A non-contrast CT head scan (NCCTH) is the most common cross-sectional imaging investigation requested in the emergency department. Advances in computer vision have led to development of several artificial intelligence (AI) tools to detect abnormalities on NCCTH. These tools are intended to provide clinical decision support for clinicians, rather than stand-alone diagnostic devices. However, validation studies mostly compare AI performance against radiologists, and there is relative paucity of evidence on the impact of AI assistance on other healthcare staff who review NCCTH in their daily clinical practice.

A retrospective data set of 150 NCCTH will be compiled, to include 60 control cases and 90 cases with intracranial haemorrhage, hypodensities suggestive of infarct, midline shift, mass effect or skull fracture. The intracranial haemorrhage cases will be subclassified into extradural, subdural, subarachnoid, intraparenchymal and intraventricular. 30 readers will be recruited across four National Health Service (NHS) trusts including 10 general radiologists, 15 emergency medicine clinicians and 5 CT radiographers of varying experience. Readers will interpret each scan first without, then with, the assistance of the qER EU 2.0 AI tool, with an intervening 2-week washout period. Using a panel of neuroradiologists as ground truth, the stand-alone performance of qER will be assessed, and its impact on the readers’ performance will be analysed as change in accuracy (area under the curve), median review time per scan and self-reported diagnostic confidence. Subgroup analyses will be performed by reader professional group, reader seniority, pathological finding, and neuroradiologist-rated difficulty.

The study has been approved by the UK Healthcare Research Authority (IRAS 310995, approved 13 December 2022). The use of anonymised retrospective NCCTH has been authorised by Oxford University Hospitals. The results will be presented at relevant conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

NCT06018545.

The aim of this paper was to explore the experiences and support needs of ethnically diverse healthcare staff and how they were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

A qualitative study using focus groups conducted remotely on Microsoft Teams.

The study took place across 10 National Health Service Trusts in England; 5 were Acute Hospitals Trusts and 5 were Community and Mental Health Trusts.

55 participants across 16 focus groups took part in the study. Participants were all healthcare staff members from ethnically diverse backgrounds.

Seven themes were generated which highlighted issues of negative experiences of discrimination at work, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, including participants often finding line managers unsupportive, appearing to lack care and compassion, and not understanding ethnic diversity issues. Participants identified many reasons for finding it difficult to speak up when faced with such experiences, such as feeling unsafe to do so, or feeling too exhausted to keep speaking up. Other staff had more positive experiences and described supportive interventions, and despite workplace difficulties, many participants discussed remaining motivated to work in the National Health Service.

Negative day-to-day experiences of ethnically diverse healthcare staff, and the difficulty of speaking up about these align with other, international literature on this topic. Progress in the area of staff equality is vital if healthcare organisations are to continue to provide high-quality patient care and retain skilled, compassionate staff who value their place of work. Recent literature suggests that many initiatives to reduce inequalities have not been successful, and there is a call for fundamental, cultural-level change. Future research is needed to understand how best to implement these organisational-level changes and to evaluate their effectiveness.