Little is known regarding how non-specialist nurses communicate with patients living with cancer when the patients are receiving care outside of their cancer units/teams. This scoping review aims to identify, examine and report on the currently available evidence about communication by non-specialist nurses when caring for adults living with cancer outside of their cancer care unit/teams.

A scoping review following the JBI methodology for scoping reviews will be conducted. We will search for empirical studies that meet the inclusion criteria in six databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and PsycINFO). Handsearching in references of included articles will be performed to find additional articles. The population of interest will be non-specialist nurses. Three concepts will be explored, namely (1) all adult patients living with cancer, (2) a focus on three stages of the cancer continuum of care (cancer diagnosis, treatment and survivorship) and (3) a focus on communication between non-specialist nurses and patients living with cancer. We will include studies describing all healthcare settings outside patients’ specialised cancer units or oncology teams. After article selection, two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts and perform a full-text article review, risk of bias assessments and data extraction. A third reviewer will resolve all disagreements. A narrative summary will provide an overview of how the results relate to the research aims and questions. The included articles will be limited to English and published between 2012 and 2023.

No ethical approval is required since we will use publicly available empirical research sources. This review will provide current research on communication by non-specialist nurses with patients with a cancer diagnosis outside of an oncology setting, evidence that will support effective communication. As such, we aim to disseminate the findings in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals.

SCALE-UP II aims to investigate the effectiveness of population health management interventions using text messaging (TM), chatbots and patient navigation (PN) in increasing the uptake of at-home COVID-19 testing among patients in historically marginalised communities, specifically, those receiving care at community health centres (CHCs).

The trial is a multisite, randomised pragmatic clinical trial. Eligible patients are >18 years old with a primary care visit in the last 3 years at one of the participating CHCs. Demographic data will be obtained from CHC electronic health records. Patients will be randomised to one of two factorial designs based on smartphone ownership. Patients who self-report replying to a text message that they have a smartphone will be randomised in a 2x2x2 factorial fashion to receive (1) chatbot or TM; (2) PN (yes or no); and (3) repeated offers to interact with the interventions every 10 or 30 days. Participants who do not self-report as having a smartphone will be randomised in a 2x2 factorial fashion to receive (1) TM with or without PN; and (2) repeated offers every 10 or 30 days. The interventions will be sent in English or Spanish, with an option to request at-home COVID-19 test kits. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants using at-home COVID-19 tests during a 90-day follow-up. The study will evaluate the main effects and interactions among interventions, implementation outcomes and predictors and moderators of study outcomes. Statistical analyses will include logistic regression, stratified subgroup analyses and adjustment for stratification factors.

The protocol was approved by the University of Utah Institutional Review Board. On completion, study data will be made available in compliance with National Institutes of Health data sharing policies. Results will be disseminated through study partners and peer-reviewed publications.

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05533918 and NCT05533359.

Time is a fundamental component of acute stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) care, thus minimising prehospital delays is a crucial part of the stroke chain of survival. COVID-19 restrictions were introduced in Ireland in response to the pandemic, which resulted in major societal changes. However, current research on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on prehospital care for stroke/TIA is limited to early COVID-19 waves. Thus, we aimed to investigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on ambulance time intervals and suspected stroke/TIA call volume for adults with suspected stroke and TIA in Ireland, from 2018 to 2021.

We conducted a secondary data analysis with a quasi-experimental design.

We used data from the National Ambulance Service in Ireland. We defined the COVID-19 period as ‘1 March 2020–31 December 2021’ and the pre-COVID-19 period ‘1 January 2018–29 February 2020’.

We compared five ambulance time intervals: ‘allocation performance’, ‘mobilisation performance’, ‘response time’, ‘on scene time’ and ‘conveyance time’ between the two periods using descriptive and regression analyses. We also compared call volume for suspected stroke/TIA between the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods using interrupted time series analysis.

We included all suspected stroke/TIA cases ≥18 years who called the National Ambulance Service from 2018 to 2021.

40 004 cases were included: 19 826 in the pre-COVID-19 period and 19 731 in the COVID-19 period. All ambulance time intervals increased during the pandemic period compared with pre-COVID-19 (p

A ’shock' like a pandemic has a negative impact on the prehospital phase of care for time-sensitive conditions like stroke/TIA. System evaluation and public awareness campaigns are required to ensure maintenance of prehospital stroke pathways amidst future healthcare crises. Thus, this research is relevant to routine and extraordinary prehospital service planning.

Neoadjuvant therapy has become a standard treatment for patients with stage II/III HER2 positive and triple negative breast cancer, and in well-selected patients with locally advanced and borderline resectable high risk, luminal B breast cancer. Side effects of neoadjuvant therapy, such as fatigue, cardiotoxicity, neurotoxicity, anxiety, insomnia, vasomotor symptoms, gastrointestinal disturbance as well as a raft of immune-related adverse events, may impact treatment tolerance, long-term outcomes, and quality of life. Providing early supportive care prior to surgery (typically termed ‘prehabilitation’) may mitigate these side effects and improve quality of life.

During our codesign of the intervention, consumers and healthcare professionals expressed desire for a programme that ‘packaged’ care, was easy to access, and was embedded in their care pathway. We hypothesise that a multimodal supportive care programme including exercise and complementary therapies, underpinned by behavioural change theory will improve self-efficacy, quality of life, readiness for surgery and any additional treatment for women with breast cancer. We seek to explore cardiometabolic, residual cancer burden and surgical outcomes, along with chemotherapy completion (relative dose intensity). This article describes the protocol for a feasibility study of a multimodal prehabilitation programme.

This is a prospective, mixed-method, feasibility study of a multi-modal programme in a hospital setting for 20–30 women with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Primary outcomes are recruitment rate, retention rate, adherence and acceptability. Secondary outcomes include patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), surgical outcomes, length of stay, satisfaction with surgery, chemotherapy completion rates, changes in metabolic markers and adverse events. Interviews and focus groups to understand the experience with prehabilitation and different factors that may affect feasibility of the intervention . The output of this study will be a codesigned, evidence-informed intervention assessed for feasibility and acceptability by women with breast cancer and the healthcare professionals that care for them.

The study received ethics approval from the St Vincents Hospital HREC (HREC/2021/ETH12198). Trial results will be communicated to participants, healthcare professionals, and the public via publication and conferences.

ACTRN12622000584730.

Sub-Saharan Africa continues to experience a syndemic of HIV and non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Vertical (stand-alone) HIV programming has provided high-quality care in the region, with almost 80% of people living with HIV in regular care and 90% virally suppressed. While integrated health education and concurrent management of HIV, hypertension and diabetes are being scaled up in clinics, innovative, more efficient and cost-effective interventions that include decentralisation into the community are required to respond to the increased burden of comorbid HIV/NCD disease.

This protocol describes procedures for a process evaluation running concurrently with a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial (INTE-COMM) in Tanzania and Uganda that will compare community-based integrated care (HIV, diabetes and hypertension) with standard facility-based integrated care. The INTE-COMM intervention will manage multiple conditions (HIV, hypertension and diabetes) in the community via health monitoring and adherence/lifestyle advice (medicine, diet and exercise) provided by community nurses and trained lay workers, as well as the devolvement of NCD drug dispensing to the community level. Based on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, the process evaluation will use qualitative methods to investigate sociostructural factors shaping care delivery and outcomes in up to 10 standard care facilities and/or intervention community sites with linked healthcare facilities. Multistakeholder interviews (patients, community health workers and volunteers, healthcare providers, policymakers, clinical researchers and international and non-governmental organisations), focus group discussions (community leaders and members) and non-participant observations (community meetings and drug dispensing) will explore implementation from diverse perspectives at three timepoints in the trial implementation. Iterative sampling and analysis, moving between data collection points and data analysis to test emerging theories, will continue until saturation is reached. This process of analytic reflexivity and triangulation across methods and sources will provide findings to explain the main trial findings and offer clear directions for future efforts to sustain and scale up community-integrated care for HIV, diabetes and hypertension.

The protocol has been approved by the University College of London (UK), the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Ethics Committee (UK), the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology and the Uganda Virus Research Institute Research and Ethics Committee (Uganda) and the Medical Research Coordinating Committee of the National Institute for Medical Research (Tanzania). The University College of London is the trial sponsor. Dissemination of findings will be done through journal publications and stakeholder meetings (with study participants, healthcare providers, policymakers and other stakeholders), local and international conferences, policy briefs, peer-reviewed journal articles and publications.

ISRCTN15319595.

To test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a novel preoperative tailored sleep intervention for patients undergoing total knee replacement.

Feasibility two-arm two-centre RCT using 1:1 randomisation with an embedded qualitative study.

Two National Health Service (NHS) secondary care hospitals in England and Wales.

Preoperative adult patients identified from total knee replacement waiting lists with disturbed sleep, defined as a score of 0–28 on the Sleep Condition Indicator questionnaire.

The REST intervention is a preoperative tailored sleep assessment and behavioural intervention package delivered by an Extended Scope Practitioner (ESP), with a follow-up phone call 4 weeks postintervention. All participants received usual care as provided by the participating NHS hospitals.

The primary aim was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full trial. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, 1-week presurgery, and 3 months postsurgery. Data collected to determine feasibility included the number of eligible patients, recruitment rates and intervention adherence. Qualitative work explored the acceptability of the study processes and intervention delivery through interviews with ESPs and patients.

Screening packs were posted to 378 patients and 57 patients were randomised. Of those randomised, 20 had surgery within the study timelines. An appointment was attended by 25/28 (89%) of participants randomised to the intervention. Follow-up outcomes measures were completed by 40/57 (70%) of participants presurgery and 15/57 (26%) postsurgery. Where outcome measures were completed, data completion rates were 80% or higher for outcomes at all time points, apart from the painDETECT: 86% complete at baseline, 72% at presurgery and 67% postsurgery. Interviews indicated that most participants found the study processes and intervention acceptable.

This feasibility study has demonstrated that with some amendments to processes and design, an RCT to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the REST intervention is feasible.

ISRCTN14233189.

To explore the importance of, and barriers to achieving, diversity in early-phase clinical trials.

Qualitative interviews analysed using thematic analysis.

Five professionals (clinical researchers and methodologists) and three patient and public representatives (those with experience of early-phase clinical trials and/or those from ethnic minority backgrounds) were interviewed between June and August 2022. Participants were identified via their institutional web page, existing contacts or social media (eg, X, formerly known as Twitter).

Professionals viewed that diversity is not currently considered in all early-phase clinical trials but felt that it should always be taken into account. Such trials are primarily undertaken at a small number of centres, thus limiting the populations they can access. Referrals from clinicians based in the community may increase diversity; however, those referred are often not from underserved groups. Referrals may be hindered by the extra resources required to approach and recruit underserved groups and participants often having to undertake ‘self-driven’ referrals. Patient and public representatives stated that diversity is important in research staff and that potential participants should be informed of the need for diversity. Those from underserved groups may require clarification regarding the potential harms of a treatment, even if these are unknown. Education may improve awareness and perception of early-phase clinical trials. We provide 14 recommendations to improve diversity in early-phase clinical trials.

Diversity should be considered in all early-phase trials. Consideration is required regarding the extent of diversity and how it is addressed. The increased resources needed to recruit those from underserved groups may warrant funders to increase the funds to support the recruitment of such participants. The potential harms and societal benefits of the research should be presented to potential participants in a balanced but accurate way to increase transparency.

Co-creation approaches, such as co-design and co-production, aspire to power-sharing and collaboration between service providers and service users, recognising the specific insights each group can provide to improve health and other public services. However, an intentional focus on equity-based approaches grounded in lived experience and epistemic justice is required considering entrenched structural inequities between service-users and service-providers in public and institutional spaces where co-creation happens.

This paper presents a Charter of tenets and principles to foster a new era of ‘Equity-based Co-Creation’ (EqCC).

The Charter is based on themes heard during an International Forum held in August 2022 in Ontario, Canada, where 48 lived experience experts and researchers were purposively invited to deliberate challenges and opportunities in advancing equity in the co-creation field.

The Charter’s seven tenets—honouring worldviews, acknowledging ongoing and historical harms, operationalising inclusivity, establishing safer and brave spaces, valuing lived experiences, ‘being with’ and fostering trust, and cultivating an EqCC heartset/mindset—aim to promote intentional inclusion of participants with intersecting social positions and differing historic oppressions. This means honouring and foregrounding lived experiences of service users and communities experiencing ongoing structural oppression and socio-political alienation—Black, Indigenous and people of colour; disabled, Mad and Deaf communities, women, 2S/LGBTQIA+ communities, people perceived to be mentally ill and other minoritised groups—to address epistemic injustice in co-creation methodologies and practice, thereby providing opportunities to begin to dismantle intersecting systems of oppression and structural violence.

Each Charter tenet speaks to a multilayered, multidimensional process that is foundational to shifting paradigms about redesigning our health and social systems and changing our relational practices. Readers are encouraged to share their reactions to the Charter, their experiences implementing it in their own work, and to participate in a growing international EqCC community of practice.

Our main objective is to assess the inter-reviewer reliability (IRR) reported in published systematic literature reviews (SLRs). Our secondary objective is to determine the expected IRR by authors of SLRs for both human and machine-assisted reviews.

We performed a review of SLRs of randomised controlled trials using the PubMed and Embase databases. Data were extracted on IRR by means of Cohen’s kappa score of abstract/title screening, full-text screening and data extraction in combination with review team size, items screened and the quality of the review was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2. In addition, we performed a survey of authors of SLRs on their expectations of machine learning automation and human performed IRR in SLRs.

After removal of duplicates, 836 articles were screened for abstract, and 413 were screened full text. In total, 45 eligible articles were included. The average Cohen’s kappa score reported was 0.82 (SD=0.11, n=12) for abstract screening, 0.77 (SD=0.18, n=14) for full-text screening, 0.86 (SD=0.07, n=15) for the whole screening process and 0.88 (SD=0.08, n=16) for data extraction. No association was observed between the IRR reported and review team size, items screened and quality of the SLR. The survey (n=37) showed overlapping expected Cohen’s kappa values ranging between approximately 0.6–0.9 for either human or machine learning-assisted SLRs. No trend was observed between reviewer experience and expected IRR. Authors expect a higher-than-average IRR for machine learning-assisted SLR compared with human based SLR in both screening and data extraction.

Currently, it is not common to report on IRR in the scientific literature for either human and machine learning-assisted SLRs. This mixed-methods review gives first guidance on the human IRR benchmark, which could be used as a minimal threshold for IRR in machine learning-assisted SLRs.

CRD42023386706.

Paramedics are often first providers of care to patients experiencing non-traumatic low back pain (LBP), though their perspectives and experiences with managing these cases remain unclear.

This study explored paramedic views of the management of non-traumatic LBP including their role and experience with LBP management, barriers to referral and awareness of ambulance service guidelines.

Qualitative study using semistructured interviews conducted between January and April 2023.

New South Wales Ambulance service.

A purposive sample of 30 paramedics of different specialities employed by New South Wales Ambulance were recruited.

Paramedic accounts demonstrated the complexity, challenge, frustration and reward associated with managing non-traumatic LBP. Paramedics perceived that their primary role focused on the assessment of LBP, and that calls to ambulance services were often driven by misconceptions surrounding the management of LBP, and a person’s pain severity. Access to health services, patient factors, defensive medicine, paramedic training and education and knowledge of guidelines influenced paramedic management of LBP.

Paramedics often provide care to non-traumatic LBP cases yet depending on the type of paramedic speciality find these cases to be frustrating, challenging or rewarding to manage due to barriers to referral including access to health services, location, patient factors and uncertainty relating to litigation. Future research should explore patient perspectives towards ambulance service use for the management of their LBP.

Satisfactory management of acute pain remains a major medical challenge despite the availability of multiple therapeutic options including the fixed-dose combination (FDC) drugs. Tramadol and dexketoprofen trometamol (TRAM/DKP) 75/25 mg FDC was launched in 2018 in Asia and is widely used in the management of moderate to severe acute pain. There are limited data on its effectiveness and safety in Asian patients, and therefore, a need to better understand its usage patterns in clinical practice. We aim to understand the usage pattern of TRAM/DKP FDC, its effectiveness and tolerability in patients with moderate to severe acute pain in Asia.

REKOVER is a phase-IV, multicountry, multicentre, prospective, real-world observational study. A total of 750 postsurgical and non-surgical patients (male and female, aged 18–80 years) will be recruited from 13 tertiary-care hospitals (15 sites) in Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia. All patients prescribed with TRAM/DKP FDC and willing to participate in the study will be enrolled. The recruitment duration for each site will be 6 months. The severity of pain will be collected using Numeric Pain Rating Scale through the treatment period from day 1 to day 5, while satisfaction with the treatment will be evaluated using Patient Global Evaluation Scale at the end of treatment. Any adverse event reported during the study duration will be recorded for safety analysis (up to day 6). The study data will be entered into the ClaimIt portal and mobile application (app) (ObvioHealth, USA). All the inpatient data will be entered into the portal by the study site and for outpatient it will be done by patients through an app.

The study has been approved by the local ethics committee from each study sites in Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaysia. Findings will be disseminated through local and global conference presentations, publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals and continuing medical education.

A shared consensus on the safety about physical agent modalities (PAMs) practice in physiotherapy and rehabilitation is lacking. We aimed to develop evidence-informed and consensus-based statements about the safety of PAMs.

A RAND-modified Delphi Rounds’ survey was used to reach a consensus. We established a steering committee of the Italian Association of Physiotherapy (Associazione Italiana di Fisioterapia) to identify areas and questions for developing statements about the safety of the most commonly used PAMs in physiotherapy and rehabilitation. We invited 28 National Scientific and Technical Societies, including forensics and lay members, as a multidisciplinary and multiprofessional panel of experts to evaluate the nine proposed statements and formulate additional inputs. The level of agreement was measured using a 9-point Likert scale, with consensus in the Delphi Rounds assessed using the rating proportion with a threshold of 75%.

Overall, 17 (61%) out of 28 scientific and technical societies participated, involving their most representative members. The panel of experts mainly consisted of clinicians (88%) with expertise in musculoskeletal (47%), pelvic floor (24%), neurological (18%) and lymphatic (6%) disorders with a median experience of 30 years (IQR=17–36). Two Delphi rounds were necessary to reach a consensus. The final approved criteria list comprised nine statements about the safety of nine PAMs (ie, electrical stimulation neuromodulation, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, laser therapy, electromagnetic therapy, diathermy, hot thermal agents, cryotherapy and therapeutic ultrasound) in adult patients with a general note about populations subgroups.

The resulting consensus-based statements inform patients, healthcare professionals and policy-makers regarding the safe application of PAMs in physiotherapy and rehabilitation practice. Future research is needed to extend this consensus on paediatric and frail populations, such as immunocompromised patients.

Effective communication can help optimise healthcare interactions and patient outcomes. However, few interventions have been tested clinically, subjected to cost-effectiveness analysis or are sufficiently brief and well-described for implementation in primary care. This paper presents the protocol for determining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a rigorously developed brief eLearning tool, EMPathicO, among patients with and without musculoskeletal pain.

A cluster randomised controlled trial in general practitioner (GP) surgeries in England and Wales serving patients from diverse geographic, socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. GP surgeries are randomised (1:1) to receive EMPathicO e-learning immediately, or at trial end. Eligible practitioners (eg, GPs, physiotherapists and nurse practitioners) are involved in managing primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain. Patient recruitment is managed by practice staff and researchers. Target recruitment is 840 adults with and 840 without musculoskeletal pain consulting face-to-face, by telephone or video. Patients complete web-based questionnaires at preconsultation baseline, 1 week and 1, 3 and 6 months later. There are two patient-reported primary outcomes: pain intensity and patient enablement. Cost-effectiveness is considered from the National Health Service and societal perspectives. Secondary and process measures include practitioner patterns of use of EMPathicO, practitioner-reported self-efficacy and intentions, patient-reported symptom severity, quality of life, satisfaction, perceptions of practitioner empathy and optimism, treatment expectancies, anxiety, depression and continuity of care. Purposive subsamples of patients, practitioners and practice staff take part in up to two qualitative, semistructured interviews.

Approved by the South Central Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee on 1 July 2022 and the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales on 6 July 2022 (REC reference 22/SC/0145; IRAS project ID 312208). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed academic publications, conference presentations and patient and practitioner outlets. If successful, EMPathicO could quickly be made available at a low cost to primary care practices across the country.

ISRCTN18010240.

Smoking cessation in pregnancy remains a public health priority. Our team used the Behaviour Change Wheel to develop the Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit smoking (MOHMQuit) intervention with health system, leader (including managers and educators) and clinician components. MOHMQuit addresses a critical evidence to practice gap in the provision of smoking cessation support in antenatal care. It involves nine maternity services in New South Wales in a cluster randomised stepped-wedge controlled trial of effectiveness. This paper describes the design and rationale for the process evaluation of MOHMQuit. The process evaluation aims to assess to what extent and how MOHMQuit is being implemented (acceptability; adoption/uptake; appropriateness; feasibility; fidelity; penetration and sustainability), and the context in which it is implemented, in order to support further refinement of MOHMQuit throughout the trial, and aid understanding and interpretation of the results of the trial.

The process evaluation is an integral part of the stepped-wedge trial. Its design is underpinned by implementation science frameworks and adopts a mixed methods approach. Quantitative evidence from participating leaders and clinicians in our study will be used to produce individual and site-level descriptive statistics. Qualitative evidence of leaders’ perceptions about the implementation will be collected using semistructured interviews and will be analysed descriptively within-site and thematically across the dataset. The process evaluation will also use publicly available data and observations from the research team implementing MOHMQuit, for example, training logs. These data will be synthesised to provide site-level as well as individual-level implementation outcomes.

The study received ethical approval from the Population Health Services Research Ethics Committee for NSW, Australia (Reference 2021/ETH00887). Results will be communicated via the study’s steering committee and will also be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

Australian New Zealand Trials Registry ACTRN12622000167763. https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12622000167763.

Coal-fired power plants are major sources of air pollution which impact human health. Coal combustion byproducts released into the air include particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxide. Exposure to fine particulate matter is associated with increased risk of mortality. This scoping review will examine and summarise the current literature on the health risks of exposure to air pollution in areas in which coal-fired power plants exist.

This scoping review will be conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Five electronic databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar) will be searched for relevant articles. Studies will be included up until 31 January 2024. There will be no restriction on geographical area. The searches will be limited to studies published in English. Title, abstract, full-text screening and data extraction of relevant articles will be done by two independent reviewers. Discrepancies will be resolved by group discussion. The findings will be presented in tables with a narrative summary. This review will consider epidemiological studies and grey literature that report on the health risks of exposure to air pollution in areas where coal-fired power plants exist.

All data will be collected from published and grey literature. Ethics approval is therefore not required. We will submit our findings for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

This protocol describes the myTBI study which aims to: (1) develop an online psychoeducation platform for people with traumatic brain injury (TBI), their family members/caregivers, and healthcare staff to improve psychosocial adjustment to TBI across different phases of injury (acute, postacute, and chronic), and (2) undertake an evaluation of efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility.

A three-stage mixed-methods research design will be used. The study will be undertaken across four postacute community-based neurorehabilitation and disability support services in Western Australia. Stage 1 (interviews and surveys) will use consumer-driven qualitative methodology to: (1) understand the recovery experiences and psychosocial challenges of people with TBI over key stages (acute, postacute, and chronic), and (2) identify required areas of psychosocial support to inform the psychoeducation platform development. Stage 2 (development) will use a Delphi expert consensus method to: (1) determine the final psychoeducation modules, and (2) perform acceptance testing of the myTBI platform. Finally, stage 3 (evaluation) will be a randomised stepped-wedge trial to evaluate efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, postintervention, follow-up, and at final discharge from services. Change in outcomes will be analysed using multilevel mixed-effects modelling. Follow-up surveys will be conducted to evaluate acceptability and feasibility.

Ethics approval was granted by North Metropolitan Health Service Mental Health Research Ethics and Governance Office (RGS0000005877). Study findings will be relevant to clinicians, researchers, and organisations who are seeking a cost-effective solution to deliver ongoing psychoeducation and support to individuals with TBI across the recovery journey.

ACTRN12623000990628.

This study was conducted to establish the association between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) in non-hypertensive patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and determine the cut-off value of HbA1c for detecting LVDD.

Cross-sectional study.

This study was conducted in General Medicine Department in collaboration with the Cardiology Department at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna.

The study population comprised patients with newly diagnosed type 2 DM within the past 3 months, aged between 18 years and 80 years, who were not hypertensive and without any systemic diseases and who presented to the General Medicine Department.

The presence of LVDD was the primary outcome measure.

Among the total of 60 participants, it was observed that age (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.169, 95% CI: 1.066 to 1.283) and HbA1c (AOR: 2.625, 95% CI: 1.264 to 5.450) were found to be independent predictors for the presence of LVDD. Receiver operating characteristic analysis identified a cut-off value of HbA1c at 9.5% (80 mmol/mol) for detecting LVDD, with a specificity of 96.43%, a sensitivity of 37.5% and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 91.62%.

This study demonstrated that age and HbA1c levels are independent predictors of LVDD in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 DM without hypertension. A cut-off value of 9.5% for HbA1c was identified with a high specificity and PPV for predicting LVDD in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. This underscores the importance of conducting echocardiography in patients with newly diagnosed asymptomatic type 2 diabetes with HbA1c 9.5% or more to assess LVDD, allowing for prompt interventions if necessary and to decelerate the progression towards heart failure.

Early evidence on COVID-19 vaccine efficacy came from randomised trials. Many important questions subsequently about vaccine effectiveness (VE) have been addressed using real-world studies (RWS) and have informed most vaccination policies globally. As the questions about VE have evolved during the pandemic so have data, study design, and analytical choices. This scoping review aims to characterise this evolution and provide insights for future pandemic planning—specifically, what kinds of questions are asked at different stages of a pandemic, and what data infrastructure and methods are used?

We will identify relevant studies in the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health VIEW-hub database, which curates both published and preprint VE RWS identified from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, the WHO COVID Database, MMWR, Eurosurveillance, medRxiv, bioRxiv, SSRN, Europe PMC, Research Square, Knowledge Hub, and Google. We will include RWS of COVID-19 VE that reported COVID-19-specific or all-cause mortality (coded as ‘death’ in the ‘effectiveness studies’ data set).

Information on study characteristics; study context; data sources; design and analytic methods that address confounding will be extracted by single reviewer and checked for accuracy and discussed in a small group setting by methodological and analytic experts. A timeline mapping approach will be used to capture the evolution of this body of literature.

By describing the evolution of RWS of VE through the COVID-19 pandemic, we will help identify options for VE studies and inform policy makers on the minimal data and analytic infrastructure needed to support rapid RWS of VE in future pandemics and of healthcare strategies more broadly.

As data is in the public domain, ethical approval is not required. Findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and working-papers to policy makers.

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZHDKR