Child-to-parent violence (CPV) has received limited attention in scientific literature, but due to a recent increase in reported cases, it has become a subject of investigation. The reliability and validity of the Child-to-Parent Violence Questionnaire (CPV-Q), in separate mother and father versions, have not yet been studied in Iran. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Persian CPV-Q.

This research employed a cross-sectional design to evaluate the Persian CPV-Q’s psychometric properties. The process included translation (using backward-forward method), face validity (via impact score calculation), content validity (using content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI)), construct validity (through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA)) and reliability assessment (via test–retest, coefficient α, coefficient and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)).

The study was conducted at the Faculties of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences.

A total of 500 qualified students from Tabriz University of Medical Sciences were recruited using cluster random sampling. These participants completed the Persian CPV-Q.

Face validity was confirmed, with impact scores exceeding 1.5 for all items. Content validity was strong, with CVR=0.92 and CVI=0.89. Exploratory factor analysis revealed four factors related to violence frequency and two factors regarding reasons for violence, consistent with the original questionnaire, covering 19 and 8 items, respectively. Total variance explained was 0.30 and 0.39 for the mother’s version and 0.33 and 0.43 for the father’s version in frequency and reason sections. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test confirmed sample adequacy (

The Persian CPV-Q demonstrates adequate validity and reliability for assessing the prevalence and causes of CPV in Iranian society.

Primary care nurses (PCNs) are the second largest workforce in primary care and play a critical role in facilitating access to coordinated care and reducing health disparities. There is renewed interest in team-based primary care as a solution for health workforce challenges. Some team models enable PCNs (ie, nurse practitioners, registered nurses, licensed/registered practical nurses) to leverage one another’s expertise to work to optimal scope; the extent to which this happens depends on multiple context-dependent factors. We will conduct an umbrella review to synthesise and compare international knowledge syntheses focused on scope of practice enactment (ie., roles and activities) of PCNs in primary care.

We will conduct the umbrella review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P) guidelines, and using the Nursing Care Organization Framework as guidance. We will search a wide range of scientific electronic databases and grey literature sources, and consider articles published in English and French by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and designated key partner countries for inclusion, with no publication date limits. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles, and any disagreements will be resolved through discussion or by a third reviewer. We will use the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews to assess the quality and risk of bias in the included systematic and scoping reviews.

Results will be presented in a PRISMA Scoping Review flow diagram. We will synthesise data from included studies in a detailed literature review table and develop visual aids to communicate the shared and unique roles and activities of PCN scope of practice. We will disseminate the results of the review through peer-reviewed publications and conferences related to this field. Ethics approval is not required.

While individuals living in rural areas often have poorer health outcomes and reduced access to healthcare services compared with those in urban areas, there is a disproportionate gap in research examining rural health issues and identifying solutions to healthcare challenges. This is likely due to the numerous barriers to conducting rural health research, including the centralisation of research in urban areas and limited trained personnel and resources to conduct research in rural communities. This realist review aims to identify articles focused on building rural health research capacity and develop an evidence-based framework to be used by researchers, clinicians and policymakers to improve rural health services and well-being for rural populations.

We will conduct a realist review using the following steps: (1) develop a search strategy, (2) conduct article screening and study selection, (3) perform data extraction, quality appraisal and synthesis, (4) engage stakeholders for feedback on our findings and (5) report our findings and engage in knowledge translation. Search terms include variations of the terms ‘research’, ‘capacity building’ and ‘rural’. Databases include (since inception) Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, APA PsycINFO, ERIC and Scopus. A separate search of the same databases was also designed to identify relevant theories or frameworks related to research capacity building, using variations of the terms ‘research’, "‘capacity building’, ‘theory’ and ‘framework’. Studies will be screened by title and abstract and full text by two research team members and included based on their relevance to rural health research capacity building. We will exclude articles not published in English. We will also search the grey literature to identify rural health research centres, networks or training programmes that have not been described in the academic literature. Two research team members will extract relevant data from included studies and perform a qualitative analysis based on guidelines for realist reviews.

This review does not require ethical approval as it draws on secondary data that is publicly available. The findings will be disseminated at academic conferences, published in peer-reviewed journals and summarised in a lay report for individuals interested in developing strategies, programmes or policies to improve rural health research. The results will inform individuals developing rural health research training programmes, establishing rural research centres, or others interested in building rural health research capacity.

CRD42023444072.

Globally, studies have consistently demonstrated the harmful mental and physical health impacts of immigration detention, with high levels of distress documented among detained asylum seekers and refugees (ASR). However, the consequences of immigration detention over time on the psychological and physical health of ASR are unclear and poorly quantified.

This prospective, mixed-methods cohort study will recurrently assess and describe the health profiles of adult ASR with an experience of Australian Government-sponsored immigration detention greater than 28 days. ASR ≥18 years old released from immigration detention will be assessed at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months and annually thereafter for up to 10 years, contingent on resourcing. Five self-report scales and a structured psychiatric interview will assess the primary outcome of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, pain intensity and severity, somatic symptoms, functional impairment, physical health conditions associated with detention and engagement in available treatment of this cohort. Additionally, pre-existing health records will be accessed to identify current and previous health status and assess changes in these health indices. Quantitative findings will be triangulated with a qualitative phenomenological thematic analysis of interviews to determine additional psychosocial factors associated with the outcomes.

The study protocol was approved by the Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/73614/MonH-2021-251322). Results will be reported at conferences, in peer-reviewed publications and to all relevant stakeholder groups.