Evidence suggests a 38% risk reduction in breast and bowel cancer-specific mortality with higher levels of exercise, however, most of this evidence is observational. More clinical trials are needed to build strong evidence for exercise’s impact on recurrence and survival. This study aims to assess the feasibility, acceptability and potential efficacy of a remote, tailored exercise programme on disease-free survival in patients recently completing curative treatment for early-stage, high-risk lung, breast or bowel cancer.

This UK-based, multicentre randomised controlled basket feasibility trial compares a personalised, remote-delivered exercise programme supported by exercise professionals against usual care. Potential participants are approached if they are: aged 18 or over, diagnosed with high-risk, early-stage breast, bowel or lung cancer, and within 24 weeks of completing primary curative treatments. Participants complete objective measures of physical function (submaximal cardiovascular fitness, endurance, muscle strength and balance), body composition (bioelectrical impedance) and self-reported outcomes (total physical activity, sleep quality, general quality of life (QoL), cancer-related QoL and exercise confidence/motivation). Clinical case note review provides disease-free survival outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months. The 12-week programme is delivered remotely (via phone, email and/or video conference) with trainer contact tapering off over the subsequent 12 weeks (24 weeks total). Recruitment is ongoing with a 660-participant goal. Descriptive measures (quantitative and qualitative) will be reported for feasibility outcomes: recruitment, adherence, retention rates, data collection quality, adverse events, intervention acceptability and fidelity. A process evaluation is being conducted concurrently and is reported separately. Kaplan-Meier curves will be plotted and median disease-free survival calculated for each arm. To determine intervention impact, a log-rank test (unadjusted) will compare 2-year disease-free survival between groups within and among cancer types. Secondary outcomes (physical function status, general/cancer-specific QoL and determinants of meeting activity guidelines) will be reported at each time point.

Ethical approvals were obtained through Hull York Medical School (ID: 23/SS/0060) and UK NHS Health Research Authority (ID: 327663). Findings will be submitted for publication in high-impact journals, presentation at national and international conferences, press releases where appropriate, and dissemination activities to be decided on with the Patient Advisory Group.

ISRCTN97662203.

The UK’s medical workforce is under increasing strain, and this is compounded by increasing numbers of resident doctors diverging from specialist training pathways, instead entering non-training roles, reducing clinical hours or leaving the profession or UK workforce entirely. These decisions are shaped by both individual motivations and wider structural conditions, including unsatisfactory working conditions, limited flexibility and a perceived lack of support or autonomy. While pursuing alternative career routes offers personal and professional benefits, they can also delay progression to senior clinical roles, contributing to workforce instability. There remains limited understanding of how best to support retention, particularly given the varied contexts, settings and career trajectories of resident doctors. This realist synthesis will examine how, why and in what contexts resident doctors leave the National Health Service, and what interventions might support their retention.

This realist synthesis will follow Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards guidance and will be conducted in five iterative steps: (1) identifying existing theories to develop an initial programme theory; (2) undertaking formal and purposive searches to identify relevant UK-based literature; (3) selecting documents based on relevance and rigour; (4) extracting and coding data to support the development of explanatory insights; and (5) synthesising findings using a realist logic of analysis to develop and refine context-mechanism-outcome configurations. An advisory group will guide the review throughout. The final programme theory will inform the development of evidence-based recommendations and design principles to support resident doctor retention.

Ethical approval is not required for this synthesis of existing literature. Findings will be disseminated through academic publications, conference presentations and accessible formats, including infographics, plain English summaries and blog posts. Target audiences include resident doctors, medical educators, workforce planners and policymakers.

PROSPERO, CRD420251004453.

Scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps (collectively known as ‘big picture reviews’) in health continue to gain popularity within the evidence ecosystem. These big-picture reviews are beneficial for policy-makers, guideline developers and researchers within the field of health for understanding the available evidence, characteristics, concepts and research gaps, which are often needed to support the development of policies, guidelines and practice. However, these reviews often face criticism related to poor and inconsistent methodological conduct and reporting. There is a need to understand which areas of these reviews require further methodological clarification and exploration. The aim of this project is to develop a research agenda for scoping reviews, mapping reviews and evidence and gap maps in health by identifying and prioritising specific research questions related to methodological uncertainties.

A modified e-Delphi process will be adopted. Participants (anticipated N=100) will include patients, clinicians, the public, researchers and others invested in creating a strategic research agenda for these reviews. This Delphi will be completed in four consecutive stages, including a survey collecting the methodological uncertainties for each of the big picture reviews, the development of research questions based on that survey and two further surveys and four workshops to prioritise the research questions.

This study was approved by the University of Adelaide Human Research Ethics Committee (H-2024-188). The results will be communicated through open-access peer-reviewed publications and conferences. Videos and infographics will be developed and placed on the JBI (previously Joanna Briggs Institute) Scoping Review Network webpage.

Lung cancer is increasingly being diagnosed in non-smokers, with mounting evidence that household air pollution is a potential factor. Environmental risk factors for lung cancer in never-smokers (LCINS) in relation to combustion of biomass for heating and cooking in low-middle-income countries (LMICs) have been extensively explored. However, such evidence in high-income countries (HICs) is limited. We conducted a systematic review to explore potential relationships between exposure to cooking fumes, a type of household air pollution, and lung cancer, specifically in relation to never-smokers in HICs.

Systematic review and narrative synthesis using the Critical Analysis Skills Programme (CASP) guidelines for case–control studies.

Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane library and CINAHL were searched, from inception to March 2024. Reference lists of articles were hand searched for additional papers.

Case–control studies focusing on household air pollution and its impact on LCINS in HICs were included.

Two independent reviewers searched, screened and coded included studies using a bespoke table. Quality of evidence was assessed in the selected studies using the CASP tool for case–control studies. Retained studies used different exposure assessment and reporting methods which were sufficiently heterogeneous to preclude meta-analysis; therefore, narrative synthesis was performed.

Three papers were included, with a total of 3734 participants. All studies were conducted in Taiwan or Hong Kong, focusing on Chinese women using traditional Chinese cooking methods. All three found a dose/response correlation between exposure to cooking fumes and the risk of developing LCINS.

Chen et al assessed the risk of lung cancer risk by ‘cooking time-years’, measuring exposure to cooking fumes over a participant’s lifetime, citing OR 3.17 (95% CI 1.34 to 7.68) for the highest levels of exposure. Yu et al used ‘cooking dish-years’ as a measure of exposure to cooking fumes, with OR 8.09 (95% CI 2.57 to 25.45) for the highest exposure levels, while Ko et al found that the number of dishes cooked daily was a greater indicator of risk than the number of cooking years, citing a threefold increased risk of lung cancer among women who cooked three meals per day compared with those who cooked one (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.6 to 6.2).

Ventilation hoods were found to have a protective effect against LCINS with adjusted ORs of 0.49 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.76).

This review of three studies found a possible association between exposure to cooking fumes and the risk of developing LCINS in high-income settings. This corroborates the substantial body of evidence that links cooking fume exposure to LCINS in LMICs, with definitive confirmation of the exposure hazards.

CRD42024524445.

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) and multiple sclerosis (MS) are inflammatory diseases resulting from an interplay of genetic and environmental factors. This study aims to describe the prevalence of patients diagnosed with both conditions among those receiving hospital care in England, as well as the characteristics and healthcare resource use (HCRU) of such patients.

This study is a retrospective observational cohort study.

The study was conducted through secondary use of the English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Database. HES records care delivered by hospitals in England and associated diagnoses.

Patients who had a diagnosis code for either IBD or MS recorded in HES between January 2014 and May 2020 were included. Patients were classified as having each diagnosis individually or as having both diagnoses, in which case they were further categorised based on temporal occurrence.

The primary outcome was the prevalence of patients with a recorded diagnosis of either IBD, MS or both during the study period. Secondary outcome measures included patient demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as HCRU in the 6 months before and after the diagnosis of interest.

From an overall cohort of 352 698 patients, 1016 (0.3%) had both diagnoses. Among those with both, 29.8% (303) had a record of IBD first, 40.5% (411) had MS diagnosed first and 29.7% (302) had the first record of both diagnoses in the same episode. From the overall cohort, 80.9% (285 439) of patients had a single diagnosis of IBD, and 18.8% (66 243) of patients had a single diagnosis of MS.

The population with a dual diagnosis of IBD and MS is larger than previously reported and shows evidence of frequent interactions with secondary care.