The Quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine Evaluation Study with Addition of the Nonavalent Vaccine Study (QUEST-ADVANCE) aims to provide insight into the long-term immunogenicity and effectiveness of one, two and three HPV vaccine doses. Here, we describe the protocol for QUEST-ADVANCE.

QUEST-ADVANCE is an observational cohort study including males and females who are unvaccinated or vaccinated with the quadrivalent or nonavalent HPV vaccine in British Columbia, Canada. Female participants who are unvaccinated or vaccinated with 1–3 doses of the quadrivalent or nonavalent HPV vaccine at 9–14 years of age will be recruited approximately 5 or 12 years postvaccination eligibility. Male participants who are unvaccinated or vaccinated with 1 or 2 doses of the nonavalent HPV vaccine at 9–14 years of age will be recruited at approximately 5 years postvaccination eligibility. The study involves a maximum of four visits over a period of 4–5 years for female participants, and two visits over a 12-month period for male participants. At each visit, self-collected swabs (cervico-vaginal or penile) and questionnaire data will be collected. In each study group, a subset of participants will be invited to participate in a substudy evaluating the long-term humoral immunogenicity of the HPV vaccine. Additional blood samples will be collected from participants who are part of the immunogenicity substudy. The total required sample size is 7180 individuals. The primary objectives are (1) to examine vaccine effectiveness in males and females against prevalent genital HPV infections for one, two and three doses of the HPV vaccine compared with unvaccinated participants and (2) to evaluate if there is non-inferior immunogenicity as indicated by type-specific antibody response of one dose of the HPV vaccine in 20–27-year-old females vaccinated at 9–14 years of age compared with historical data of three doses of the HPV vaccine females vaccinated at 16–26 years of age up to 12 years postvaccination.

QUEST-ADVANCE was approved by the Research Ethics Board of the University of British Columbia/Children’s and Women’s Health Centre of British Columbia (H20-02111). Individual electronic informed consent or assent will be obtained from each participant before any study-specific procedures are undertaken. Results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal and on the study website.

The Validating Outcomes by Including Consumer Experience (VOICE) project is developing patient reported experience measure (PREM) tools to collect consumer feedback for Indigenous primary healthcare (IPHC) services’ accreditation and quality improvement processes. This study aimed to explore the views of health service staff about: (1) optimising the feasibility of collection, analysis and interpretation of findings; and (2) resourcing requirements for implementation of the PREM.

A participatory action research qualitative study design, guided by an Indigenous advisory group. Our team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers conducted semistructured focus groups and individual interviews with IPHC staff. Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Multiple sense-making meetings were conducted with the Indigenous advisory group.

Eight partner IPHC services across four Australian states and territories.

All staff were eligible and invited to participate in the study via purposive and snowball sampling. Administrative staff (eg, receptionist, programme facilitator), clinicians/practitioners (eg, general practitioner, nurse, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health workers and practitioners) and service managers (eg, CEO, practice manager) from partner health services participated.

63 staff participated; 44 attended across 13 focus groups, with the remainder participating in individual interviews. The majority of participants were between 35 years and 55 years old (52%), female (66%) and working in frontline IPHC service delivery roles (56%). Equal numbers identified as Indigenous (50%) and non-Indigenous (50%). Many had worked in the Indigenous health and well-being sector for over 10 years (40%). ‘Culturally safe care’ and ‘accountability’ were identified as primary themes and key reasons for gathering consumer feedback. Subthemes identified were ‘Relationships’, ‘trust and respect’, ‘communication about consumer feedback’, ‘timing and frequency of requesting consumer feedback’, ‘health service systems’, ‘health service and staff capacity’, ‘staff skills’ and ‘structure and administration of the PREM’. All themes and subthemes need to be considered for the successful design and implementation of PREMs in IPHC settings.

Many of the issues identified are not currently considered in the process of collecting PREM data for accreditation yet, if addressed, would likely improve the quality and relevance of data collected. The findings from this study will inform the co-design and validation of Indigenous-specific PREM tools to collect consumer feedback. Critically, service and community input will ensure the PREM tools meet service needs for continuous quality improvement and accreditation and reflect the priorities and values of Indigenous peoples.

Approximately, 20 million older adults undergo major elective surgery annually, yet less than 10% engage in advance care planning (ACP). This is a critical missed opportunity to optimally engage in patient-aligned medical decisions and communications in the perioperative setting. The PREPARE ACP programme (easy-to-read advance directives (ADs) and a patient-directed, online ACP programme) has been shown to increase ACP documentation and patient and clinician empowerment to discuss ACP. Yet, a gap remains in extending PREPARE’s use to surgical populations. We hypothesise that by delivering PREPARE in a patient-facing electronic health record (EHR) centric presurgery workflow for older adults, supported by automated patient reminders and outreach from a healthcare navigator (HCN), we can enable patients and/or surgical teams to engage in ACP discussions.

This is a three-site, single-blinded, pragmatic randomised trial comparing increasing intensity of ACP-focused, patient-facing EHR messaging and HCN support. The outreach occurs prior to a new presurgical clinic visit. We will enrol 6000 patients (2000 each site) aged 65 and older and randomise them equally to the following study arms: (Arm 1) ACP-related cover letter and PREPARE URL information sent via patient portal and postal mail (includes cover letter, AD and PREPARE pamphlet); (Arm 2) Arm 1 plus reminder message via text or MyChart message and (Arm 3) Arm 2 plus HCN outreach and support. The primary outcome is clinically meaningful ACP documentation in the EHR (ie, surrogate designation, documented discussions and ADs) within 6 months of the new surgical visit. The rate of ACP documentation will be compared between treatment groups using generalised estimating equations. Secondary outcomes include a validated four-item ACP engagement survey, administered 2 weeks after the presurgical visit and 6 months later. All analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle and recent Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines.

The study will be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki, Protection of Human Volunteers (21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 50), Institutional Review Boards (21 CFR 56) and Obligations of Clinical Investigators (21 CFR 312). The protocol and consent form were reviewed and approved by Advarra, an National Insitutes of Health (NIH)-approved, commercial, centralised Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB/Independent Ethics Committee of each participating centre reviewed and approved the protocol and consent and obtained reliance agreements with Advarra prior to study initiation. The study is guided by input from patient and clinical advisory boards and a data safety monitoring board. The results of the study will be disseminated to both academic and community stakeholders, complying with all applicable privacy laws.

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06090552.

Advarra Pro 00070994.

23-38948.

Protocol Date: 24 October 2024. Protocol Version: 4.

Although poor mental health among young people has been increasing in the past decades, many young people are reluctant to use traditional mental healthcare. To cater to the needs of young people, various youth-friendly treatment options have been developed. These include the youth-friendly health service (YFHS) standards put forth by the WHO in 2012 and the integrated youth services (IYS) for mental health developed in certain countries globally. However, no synthesis of the effect of these services on youth mental health has been conducted. The aim of the proposed study is to conduct a systematic review of the effect of mental health treatments conducted within YFHS and IYS clinics. The primary research question is what effect mental health interventions given at ‘youth-friendly’ clinics for treating mental health, such as IYS and YFHS, have on the mental health and quality of life (QoL) of young people?

A preliminary search for other reviews on the topic was conducted during the first half of 2024, after which a protocol of the present study was registered in PROSPERO. In May 2024, a search was carried out in the PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases, which gave references for 12 738 papers to be screened for inclusion in the review, and a follow-up search was carried out in April 2025, yielding a further 2182 references. For inclusion, studies must have participants between 12 and 25 years of age; interventions be given at clinics designed to be ‘youth-friendly’ or given at an IYS; control condition, if any, consisting of standard care or waiting list; outcomes must be mental health symptomology or QoL. To be included, studies must be published from 2012 and onwards. Screening of titles and abstracts in the initial search was carried out independently by two reviewers. Screening of studies found in the follow-up search and in the reference lists of included articles will be carried out in the same way. Data analysis of the initial search was conducted in the latter half of 2024, while final data analysis including the results from the follow-up search is ongoing. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools will be used to assess bias of included articles, and certainty of the evidence will be evaluated according to the GRADE methodology. A meta-analysis of the results will be performed if a sufficient amount of homogenous data is found; otherwise, a synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted.

The proposed review may form a valuable synthesis of the state of the art of treatment options catering to young people. Investigating the effectiveness of YFHS or IYS in treating young people’s mental health may inform future directions for development and research. The present study does not need ethical approval, since only previously published, ethically approved data are used in the current study. The findings of the study will be disseminated through submissions to peer-reviewed journals and international conferences, as well as disseminated within the Swedish YFHS community.

ID nr CRD42024528687.

Thanks to the introduction of recent national guidelines for treating herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis, health outcomes have improved. This paper evaluates the health system costs and the health-related quality of life implications of these guidelines.

A sub-analysis of data from a prospective, multi-centre, observational cohort ENCEPH-UK study conducted across 29 hospitals in the UK from 2012 to 2015.

Data for patients aged ≥16 years with a confirmed HSV encephalitis diagnosis admitted for treatment with aciclovir were collected at discharge, 3 and 12 months.

Patient health outcomes were measured by the Glasgow outcome score (GOS), modified ranking score (mRS) and the EuroQoL; healthcare costs were estimated per patient at discharge from hospital and at 12 months follow-up. In addition, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were calculated from the EQ-5D utility scores. Cost–utility analysis was performed using the NHS and Social Care perspective.

A total of 49 patients were included; 35 were treated within 48 hours, ‘early’ (median (IQR) 8.25 [3.7–20.5]) and 14 were treated after 48 hours ‘delayed’ (median (IQR) 93.9 [66.7–100.1]). At discharge, 30 (86%) in the early treatment group had a good mRS outcome score (0–3) compared with 4 (29%) in the delayed group. According to GOS, 10 (29%) had a good recovery in the early treatment group, but only 1 (7%) in the delayed group. EQ-5D-3L utility value at discharge was significantly higher for early treatment (0.609 vs 0.221, p

This study suggests that early treatment may be associated with better health outcomes and reduced patient healthcare costs, with a potential for savings to the NHS with faster treatment.

The Episodic Disability Questionnaire (EDQ) was developed to measure the presence, severity and episodic nature of disability experienced among persons with chronic conditions. Our aim was to assess the sensibility, utility and implementation considerations of the EDQ among older adults with complex health needs.

Cross-sectional measurement study involving quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection.

We recruited community-dwelling older adults (65 years of age or older) living with complex health needs receiving care from a primary healthcare team in Toronto, Canada.

We administered the EDQ, sensibility questionnaire (assessing face and content validity, and ease of usage, with each item scored from 0 to 7 with greater scores indicating greater sensibility) and demographic questionnaire, followed by a semi-structured interview in the home or clinical setting. Using an interview guide, we asked participants about their perspectives on utility, format and implementation of the EDQ in clinical practice. We considered the EDQ sensible if the median score on the sensibility questionnaire was ≥5/7 for ≥80% of items and if none of the items had a median score of ≤3/7. We conducted a team-based directed content analysis of the interview transcripts.

The median age of the 11 participants in this study was 83 years of age. All participants reported living with two or more chronic health conditions, with osteoarthritis (n=5) and diabetes (n=4) most frequently reported. The EDQ met the criterion for sensibility as measured by the sensibility questionnaire. Interview data from participants (n=10) indicated that the EDQ represents the health-related challenges among this sample of older adults with complex health needs, captures the episodic nature of disability and was easy to use. Utility of the EDQ included providing clinicians with a holistic understanding of health challenges older adults face, aiding in intervention planning and measuring changes in disability over time. Six of the participants also expressed uncertainty as to how the EDQ specifically could be used by clinicians in their care. Considerations for implementation included mode of administration (paper or electronic) and the importance of communicating EDQ scores with older adults based on individual preferences.

The EDQ possesses sensibility and utility for use among this sample of older adults living with complex health needs in home or clinical care settings.

Most clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for assessing and managing people’s chronic pain focus on specific pain conditions, body sites or life course stages. This creates complexity for clinicians making care choices in the absence of a diagnosis and/or where a person experiences more than one pain condition. Specific to this context is the ICD-11 classification of chronic primary pain where an experience of pain cannot be better accounted for by another condition. CPGs for chronic primary pain, agnostic to condition or body part, may support clinicians towards best pain care since many of the principles of person-centred chronic pain care are transdiagnostic. The two aims of this systematic review are to (1) identify and appraise CPGs for chronic primary pain, relevant across the life course and (2) map the CPG content against a pain care priority framework to evaluate the extent to which the CPG content aligns with the priorities of people with lived chronic pain experience.

We will systematically search nine scholarly databases, the Epistemonikos database and international and national guidelines clearinghouses. CPGs published within 2015–2025, in any language, that offer recommendations about assessment and/or management of chronic primary pain for people of any age, excluding hospitalised inpatients or institutionalised populations, will be included. Pairs of reviewers will independently screen citations for eligibility and appraise CPG quality and implementation potential using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE)-II and the AGREE-Recommendations Excellence tools, respectively. Data extraction will include the citation and scope characteristics of each CPG, methods used to develop recommendations, verbatim recommendations, guiding principles or practice information and narrative excerpts related to the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) considerations (or equivalent). We will use the PROGRESS-PLUS framework as a checklist to identify whether determinants of health equity were considered by guideline developers. CPG recommendations will be organised according to common topics and categorised in a matrix according to strength and direction. Qualitative content analysis will be used to synthesise excerpts relating to GRADE EtD considerations (or equivalent), and we will map extracted data against an established chronic pain care priority framework to determine the extent to which the CPGs align with values and preferences of people with lived experience. Interpretation will be informed by an interdisciplinary Advisory Group, including lived experience partners.

Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review. Results will be disseminated through publication in an open-access peer-reviewed journal, through professional societies, and integrated into education curricula and public-facing resources. Reporting will be consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.

CRD420251000482.

Treatment expectations are a key mechanism of placebo effects in clinical trials. In a previous study (PSY-HEART-I), preoperative expectation optimisation improved quality of life 6 months postcardiac surgery. However, barriers such as travel distance, staffing shortages and COVID-19 limited participation. This study evaluates the feasibility and acceptability of iEXPECT, a brief internet-based intervention designed to optimise expectations before heart surgery.

In this three-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial, 160 patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery are randomised to: (a) standard of care (SOC); (b) SOC plus iEXPECT with phone-based guidance (iEXPECT enhanced) or (c) SOC plus iEXPECT with email-based guidance (iEXPECT limited). The intervention includes four 20 min online modules addressing surgical benefits, side effects and coping strategies. Modules are accompanied by personalised guidance provided through feedback on each module via email or telephone (three before surgery, three booster sessions at 6, 12 and 18 weeks postsurgery). Assessments occur at baseline (5–21 days before surgery), preoperatively (day before surgery), 7 days postsurgery and 6 months later. Primary feasibility outcomes include recruitment (≥1 participant/week/centre), retention (≥49% completing 6-month follow-up including biomarkers) and engagement (≥75% completing ≥1 presurgery module). Acceptability is measured by self-reported enjoyment, usefulness and impact, with acceptance defined as mean scores >3.4 (5-point Likert scale) and CSQ-I ratings. Secondary outcomes include psychological measures, inflammatory markers and heart rate variability.

Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committees of Philipps University Marburg (AZ 229/23 BO) and the University of Giessen (AZ 186/23). All participants provide written informed consent. Results will be shared via publications, conferences and public outreach with relevant consumer advocacy groups.

DRKS00033284.

In 2022, the WHO conditionally recommended the use of treatment decision algorithms (TDAs) for treatment decision-making in children

Within the Decide-TB project (PACT ID: PACTR202407866544155, 23 July 2024), we aim to generate an individual-participant dataset (IPD) from prospective TB diagnostic accuracy cohorts (RaPaed-TB, UMOYA and two cohorts from TB-Speed). Using the IPD, we aim to: (1) assess the diagnostic accuracy of published TDAs using a set of consensus case definitions produced by the National Institute of Health as reference standard (confirmed and unconfirmed vs unlikely TB); (2) evaluate the added value of novel tools (including biomarkers and artificial intelligence-interpreted radiology) in the existing TDAs; (3) generate an artificial population, modelling the target population of children eligible for WHO-endorsed TDAs presenting at primary and secondary healthcare levels and assess the diagnostic accuracy of published TDAs and (4) identify clinical predictors of radiological disease severity in children from the study population of children with presumptive TB.

This study will externally validate the first data-driven WHO TDAs in a large, well-characterised and diverse paediatric IPD derived from four large paediatric cohorts of children investigated for TB. The study has received ethical clearance for sharing secondary deidentified data from the ethics committees of the parent studies (RaPaed-TB, UMOYA and TB Speed) and as the aims of this study were part of the parent studies’ protocols, a separate approval was not necessary. Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at local, regional and international scientific meetings and conferences. This database will serve as a catalyst for the assessment of the inclusion of novel tools and the generation of an artificial population to simulate the impact of novel diagnostic pathways for TB in children at lower levels of healthcare. TDAs have the potential to close the diagnostic gap in childhood TB. Further finetuning of the currently available algorithms will facilitate this and improve access to care.

Millions of patients receive general anaesthesia every year with either propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) or inhaled volatile anaesthesia (INVA). It is currently unknown which of these techniques is superior in relation to patient experience, safety and clinical outcomes. The primary aims of this trial are to determine (1) whether patients undergoing (a) major inpatient surgery, (b) minor inpatient surgery or (c) outpatient surgery have a superior quality of recovery after INVA or TIVA and (2) whether TIVA confers no more than a small (0.2%) increased risk of definite intraoperative awareness than INVA.

This protocol was co-created by a diverse team, including patient partners with personal experience of TIVA or INVA. The design is a 13 000-patient, multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised, comparative effectiveness trial. Patients 18 years of age or older, undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery requiring general anaesthesia with a tracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway will be eligible. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to one of two anaesthetic approaches, TIVA or INVA, using minimisation. The primary effectiveness endpoints are Quality of Recovery-15 (QOR-15) score on postoperative day (POD) 1 in patients undergoing (1) major inpatient surgery, (2) minor inpatient surgery or (3) outpatient surgery, and the primary safety endpoint is the incidence of unintended definite intraoperative awareness with recall in all patients, assessed on POD1 or POD30. Secondary endpoints include QOR-15 score on POD0, POD2 and POD7; incidence of delirium on POD0 and POD1; functional status on POD30 and POD90; health-related quality of life on POD30, POD90, POD180 and POD365; days alive and at home at POD30; patient satisfaction with anaesthesia at POD2; respiratory failure on POD0; kidney injury on POD7; all-cause mortality at POD30 and POD90; intraoperative hypotension; moderate-to-severe intraoperative movement; unplanned hospital admission after outpatient surgery in a free-standing ambulatory surgery centre setting; propofol-related infusion syndrome and malignant hyperthermia.

This study is approved by the ethics board at Washington University, serving as the single Institutional Review Board for all participating sites. Recruitment began in September 2023. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, internet-based educational materials and mass media.

NCT05991453.

Palliative cancer care is comprehensive, specialised medical care of patients that aims to alleviate physical, mental and emotional distress based on patients’ needs rather than on prognosis. In Ethiopia, the federal ministry of health started palliative care (PC) in 2016. Since then, services have been developed and integrated as important components of the Health Sector Transformation Plan II. However, there is a scarcity of nationally summarised data regarding PC service utilisation in Ethiopia. Therefore, this protocol describes a planned systematic review and meta-analysis that will evaluate utilisation of PC services and its predictors among adult cancer patients in Ethiopia.

The online databases of PubMed, Hinari, EMBASE, CINHAL, Science Direct, Scopus and Google Scholar will be comprehensively searched from inception to 31 February 2025. To assess the quality of included studies, the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools will be used. The statistical software STATA V.17 will be used for data analyses. To examine the heterogeneity between studies, inverse variance (I²) will be used. To calculate the pooled prevalence of PC service utilisation, a fixed or random effects meta-analyses model will be used with a 95% CI, depending on the presence or absence of heterogeneity between included studies. To look for publication bias, a visual inspection of the funnel plot and Egger and Begg’s regression test and a 5% level of significance will be used.

Ethical approval is not applicable. The results will be disseminated to academic beneficiaries and the public.

Prolonged QTc is a major risk factor for ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD). Anaemia’s impact on the QT interval is unclear and conflicting despite its association with increased mortality.

We investigated the association between anaemia and the prevalence of QTc prolongation, as well as potential gender differences in this relationship. Additionally, we examined whether haemoglobin levels were associated with QTc prolongation.

Observational cross-sectional study.

Sheshdeh, Fasa, Iran.

We analysed data from 5741 participants from the general population (aged 35–70 years) with no history of ischaemic heart disease; myocardial infarction; amiodarone use; multiple blood transfusions; or supplementation with iron, folic acid or cobalamin.

Anaemia was defined according to WHO guidelines (haemoglobin 450 ms in men or >470 ms in women.

Among 5741 participants, mean QTc was 427.91±24.75 ms, with QTc prolongation in 7.14%. Anaemia raised the odds of QTc prolongation by 60% (OR=1.60, 95%CI 1.12 to 2.28, p=0.010), particularly in females (OR=1.73, 95%CI 1.12 to 2.66, p=0.013), but not in males. Higher haemoglobin levels were associated with lower QTc prolongation risk (OR=0.91 per unit increase, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.97, p=0.005). No significant associations were observed between anaemia type/severity and QTc prolongation among anaemic individuals.

Anaemia was significantly associated with QTc prolongation, particularly in females. Anaemia type/severity did not affect QTc prolongation. Anaemia is associated with increased odds of QTc prolongation, particularly in women. While causality cannot be inferred from this cross-sectional analysis, the findings suggest that clinicians may consider QTc monitoring in anaemic patients, especially women and exercise caution when prescribing QT-prolonging medications. Prospective studies are needed to confirm whether anaemia directly contributes to QTc prolongation or arrhythmic risk.

To address the lack of accurate and accessible mental health medicines-information resources for children, young people and their parents/guardians using design thinking to co-design free-to-use, video resources tailored to this audience.

A multiphase qualitative case study using the Double Diamond model of Design Thinking: Discover, Define, Develop and Deliver. This included iterative prototyping, thematic analysis and public and patient involvement throughout.

Dublin, Ireland with online distribution of the final resources internationally through a free, open-access platform.

A multidisciplinary co-design team including two specialist mental health pharmacists, two academic pharmacists, five consultant psychiatrists, a psychiatric nurse, a youth content specialist, three youth activists and a parent representative.

26 co-designed, medicines-information videos were created, including versions for children (voiced by children), parents/guardians and young people. Videos feature storytelling formats with Bitmoji characters. Feedback from youth and parent collaborators guided design and content. Since launch, www.youthmed.info has had over 25 000 website views and more than 30 000 video views, with engagement from over 91 countries. The resources are also linked on national and international clinical and charity platforms.

Youth Med.Info addresses a gap in accessible, accurate mental health medicines-information by placing users – children, young people, parents/guardians and clinicians—at the centre of its design.

Vaping among children and young people (CYP) has increased globally over the past decade, with rates stabilising in the UK in recent years. Factors such as curiosity, social influence, stress management and attractive flavours contribute to its popularity. Although the long-term health impacts are uncertain, vaping poses risks including nicotine dependence, cardiovascular and respiratory issues, and cognitive impairment, though evidence on long-term effects is still emerging. Despite established smoking cessation programmes for adults, tailored resources for vaping cessation among CYP remain scarce, particularly within healthcare settings, which offer unique opportunities for professional intervention and ongoing support. The objective of this review is to assess the extent and nature of available literature on interventions delivered in healthcare settings to support vaping cessation among CYP under the age of 18 years.

This scoping review will include studies targeting CYP under the age of 18 years, specifically focusing on interventions delivered within healthcare settings. Studies outside healthcare contexts or those without healthcare provider involvement will be excluded. Additionally, interventions delivered solely to parents or carers will not be considered.

A comprehensive search will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from January 2004 to present, with additional grey literature from sources including grey literature repositories and Google Scholar. Results will be imported into Rayyan for screening, with two independent reviewers assessing studies for inclusion. Data extraction will include study design, population characteristics (including explicit age ranges, specifically CYP under 18 years), intervention details and outcomes. A descriptive synthesis will map study characteristics, while thematic analysis will identify intervention themes and healthcare contexts.

Ethics approval is not required for this secondary analysis. Findings will be disseminated through publication, conference presentations and shared with public health stakeholders.