Surgical margins are crucial in determining postoperative local recurrence (LR) in patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Achieving a margin greater than 1 cm can be challenging due to constraints related to remnant liver reserve, proximity to major vascular structures and tumour depth. We previously published findings from a retrospective study suggesting that additional margin coagulation (AMC) using radiofrequency may reduce LR, and this multicentre randomised clinical trial aims to further assess this hypothesis.

The LIVERATION trial is an international, multicentre, single-blind, randomised, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial involving 698 patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM or HCC. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either AMC (study group) or conventional liver resection (control group) to assess oncological outcomes for both CRLM and HCC. The primary outcome is the incidence of LR. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, disease-free survival, cancer-specific survival, surgical complications and quality of life. Follow-ups occur at 30 days, 90 days, and 1, 2 and 3 years postoperatively.

The LIVERATION trial has been approved by the Ethics Committee at the sponsor site Hospital del Mar de Barcelona, CEIM-PSMAR (Comité de Ética de la Investigación con Medicamentos – Parc de Salut Mar), as well as by the Institutional Ethics Committees in all participating countries. The results of the main trial, along with each of the secondary endpoints, will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The study adheres to national and international guidelines, including the Declaration of Helsinki, and complies with regulations for studies involving biological samples under Law 14/2007 on Biomedical Research. A dissemination strategy has been developed to engage stakeholders and facilitate knowledge transfer to support the use of the findings of the study. LIVERATION is funded by the European Union under the Horizon Europe Framework Programme (Project Number: 101104360).

NCT05492136.

To investigate the occurrence of depression and mental health disorders other than depression among Brazilian people with intellectual disabilities, analysing data from a national household survey.

Cross-sectional epidemiological study using data from the 2019 National Health Survey (PNS).

Brazil, nationwide data collection in urban and rural private households.

272 499 individuals, among whom 1.2% (n=3198) reported intellectual disabilities.

Self-reported depression and mental health disorders other than depression (anxiety, panic, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psychosis or obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD)), either isolated or comorbid.

Among people with intellectual disabilities, 43.2% reported at least one mental health disorder versus 13.7% without disabilities. In adults aged 0–59 years, intellectual disability was associated with higher odds of depression (adjusted OR (aOR) 3.25, 95% CI 1.76 to 6.00), mental health disorders other than depression (aOR 12.23, 95% CI 7.52 to 19.90) and depression associated with other mental health disorders (aOR 14.34, 95% CI 7.92 to 25.96). In older adults (≥60 years), risks also remained elevated: depression (aOR 1.71, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.79), mental health disorders other than depression (aOR 4.33, 95% CI 2.09 to 8.94) and depression associated with other mental health disorders (aOR 2.98, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.95). Women with intellectual disabilities were more likely to report depression and multimorbidity, while men more often reported non-depressive disorders. Poorer self-perceived health was consistently linked to worse outcomes across age groups.

Mental health disorders and their comorbidities are significantly more prevalent among people with intellectual disabilities in Brazil. These findings highlight the urgent need for inclusive, equitable and specialised mental healthcare policies.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancer, are major global public health concerns. Diet quality—particularly the consumption of ultra-processed foods—has been associated with increased risk of NCDs. Traditional cohort studies are often expensive and logistically complex. The NutriNet-Brasil cohort leverages a web-based approach, offering a cost-effective and practical solution for comprehensive data collection and long-term follow-up.

Recruitments began in January 2020 through mass media, social media campaigns and collaborations with health organisations. Eligible participants are adults (aged ≥18 years) living in Brazil with internet access. Participants complete self-administered online questionnaires covering dietary intake, health status and other health determinants. Dietary assessment is based on the Nova classification system, which categorises foods by their level of processing.

Over 88 000 participants have completed the initial questionnaire. The cohort is predominantly women (79.9%) and highly educated (67.9% had completed higher education). The web-based design enabled the development and application of innovative dietary assessment tools, including the Nova24h and the Nova24hScreener, specifically designed to evaluate food processing levels. These tools have shown good performance in capturing dietary patterns and are central to the cohort’s aim. The online platform facilitates efficient recruitment, data collection and participant retention.

NutriNet-Brasil is pioneering the development of web-based cohort methodologies and instruments tailored to food processing research. Future work includes leveraging collaborations with national and international research centres to conduct multidisciplinary analyses and inform public health policies.

The COVID-19 pandemic’s unprecedented nature has exposed significant vulnerabilities in most public health systems and highlighted the importance of coordinated responses across various levels of government. A global debate emerged on the types of health measures necessary to curb the rapid spread of contagious and/or lethal diseases. However, some of these measures involved restricting individual rights, raising significant ethical, legal and public health questions. The protocol of this systematic review aims to address a critical gap in the literature by analysing how Public Health Surveillance services worldwide implemented compulsory right-restricting measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, and what impacts these measures had on public health outcomes and individual rights.

This protocol focuses on studies about right-restricting measures enacted by Public Health Surveillance services during the COVID-19 pandemic. It will be unrestrictive as to period (starting in 2019, when the outbreak was identified), language or publication status in a preliminary stage. It will include only peer-reviewed publications, discarding opinion articles, editorials, conference papers and non-peer-reviewed publications. Considering the PICo strategy, the research question of this systematic review can be formulated as follows: Problem—right-restricting measures enacted by Public Health Surveillance services; Interest—implementation modalities and impacts on individual rights and public health outcomes; Context—COVID-19 pandemic. This protocol will use the following databases: Pubmed, Cochrane/CENTRAL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. Considering the various measures that may have been adopted, the following categories of analysis will be used: (i) Public Health Surveillance as a field, (ii) the various specific areas of Health Surveillance, (iii) law enforcement, (iv) right-restricting measures and consent, (v) interactions between right-restricting measures and routine Public Health Surveillance functions, (vi) differences between countries and (vii) Health Surveillance lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic. These categories are not strictly mutually exclusive; however, each study will be assigned to the category most aligned with its primary focus. To ensure the validity and reliability of findings, each study will have its risk of bias assessed at both the study and outcome levels.

Patients and the public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination plans of this systematic review. The results will be presented in one or more articles to be submitted to scientific journals and may also be presented at scientific conferences and to public policy makers.

This systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 20 November 2024 (registration number CRD42024613039).