Approximately one in every six children and adolescents is affected by mental disorders, which impose significant costs on patients, their families and societies. Psychotherapy is the first-line treatment for many of these disorders, and systematic reviews of post-intervention effects show small to moderate favourable outcomes compared with control groups. However, the long-term effects of psychotherapy remain less well understood.

The LaKiJu META project aims to address this gap by developing an open-access database, which will subsequently be used for data synthesis. This database will be established through literature searches in nine databases for (cluster) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the long-term effects (≥6 months) of any type of psychotherapy in school-aged children and adolescents (ages 6;00 to 17;11 years) with mental disorders. Outcomes will be prioritised based on their relevance to patients, caregivers and clinicians and will encompass a broad range of measures, including symptom changes, response rates and reliable changes. Syntheses will use multilevel meta-analyses to compare intervention and control groups at follow-up assessments, across both transdiagnostic and disorder-specific symptom outcomes. In secondary analyses, we will examine changes within intervention groups over time. Moderator analyses will focus on the effects of study-, intervention- and patient-level characteristics.

Ethical approval for public involvement was obtained from the ethics committee of the Faculty of Psychology of the Ruhr University Bochum. For dissemination, we will employ tailored strategies to reach researchers, clinicians, patients and their caregivers, with all groups involved in the development of dissemination plans.

CRD420251003208 (preregistered on 10 March 2025).

Cardiovascular events (CVEs), in particular acute coronary syndrome (ACS), complicate the course of a significant number of patients hospitalised for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or influenza. Emerging evidence suggests that this increased risk of CVEs could be mitigated by the use of acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin). The ASCAP study investigates whether the addition of aspirin to standard therapy in hospitalised patients with moderate-to-severe CAP or influenza can reduce the incidence of CVEs.

The ASCAP study is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in 16 university and general hospitals in the Netherlands, in which patients are randomised to acetylsalicylic acid or matching placebo for 90 days. Eligible patients are adults hospitalised for moderate-to-severe CAP or influenza. Patients with antithrombotic or anticoagulant drugs, or those with contraindications for aspirin, are excluded. The primary outcome is the incidence of ACS up to day 180. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events up to day 180, as well as the incidence of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events up to day 90, all-cause mortality up to day 180 and quality of life and societal costs up to day 180. Survival time will be analysed by the log-rank test, stratified for CAP and influenza, with a two-sided alpha of 0.05. Assuming an average baseline ACS risk of 7.5% over 180 days with up to 30% variation across strata, and a 60% hazard reduction due to aspirin, the required sample size to achieve 80% power is 760 patients. Currently, 114 patients are enrolled in the study.

This study is approved by the Medical Ethics Committee Amsterdam UMC (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) under reference number 2023.0741 and registered under EU trial number 2023-504553-12-01 in the EU portal CTIS (Clinical Trials Information System). Results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

EU CTIS: 2023-504553-12-01.

Head and neck cancer (HNC) affects the mouth, throat, salivary glands, voice box, nose or sinuses. Every year, over 12 000 people in the UK are diagnosed with HNC. Neck dissection is a key, surgical component of patient care. However, many people experience postoperative restriction in shoulder and neck movements, pain, fatigue and low mood, with only half ever returning to work.

Getting Recovery Right After Neck Dissection (GRRAND) is a two-arm, multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. The trial aims to compare clinical and cost-effectiveness of a personalised physiotherapy programme (GRRAND programme) versus usual practice, National Health Service (NHS), postdischarge care.

The planned sample size is 390 participants. Participants will be recruited from across UK sites and followed up for 12 months. The primary outcome is the shoulder pain and disability index at 12 months. Economic evaluation will be conducted from a healthcare system and personal social services perspective. Secondary outcome data, including pain, function, health-related quality of life, mental well-being, health resource use and adverse events, will be collected at 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months, with exercise adherence at 6 weeks. A process evaluation will determine how GRRAND is implemented, delivered and received across clinical settings, exploring what works, for whom and under what conditions. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis and reported inline with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.

The trial was approved by the London-Brent Research Ethics Committee (ref: 24/LO/0722) on 15 October 2024. Trial results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at national and international conferences, in lay summaries and social media. This protocol adheres to the recommended Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials checklist.

ISRCTN13855775.

Digitalisation in healthcare has resulted in fragmented solutions and limited interoperability. The Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard is increasingly adopted to enable standardised data exchange, yet its complexity creates usability challenges for clinicians and developers. To address these challenges, this study evaluates the usability of an enhanced FHIR Questionnaire Resource Editor designed to improve workflow efficiency, accessibility and user satisfaction in creating and managing healthcare questionnaires.

This mixed-methods usability evaluation will recruit 10 healthcare professionals and/or informatics experts via convenience sampling. The study will consist of four general phases: (1) an initial session to familiarise users with the tool; (2) a task analysis phase supported by eye-tracking to identify strengths and weaknesses; (3) retrospective think-aloud interviews to explore strategies used during tasks and (4) completion of a validated usability questionnaire, such as the System Usability Scale, to quantify user satisfaction. We will analyse quantitative data using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative feedback will be examined through thematic analysis and affinity mapping. The primary outcome is to assess the editor’s usability and accessibility and to identify areas for improvement.

This study protocol has been reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty at the University of Würzburg (ethikkommission@uni-wuerzburg.de) under approval number (24/24-sc). All participants will provide informed consent. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and open-access platforms to inform future iterations of FHIR-based tools.

Discharge planning (DP) is essential to ensure continuity of care during patient transitions between inpatient and outpatient settings. Although DP has been legally required for all hospitals in Germany since 2017, several studies show considerable variation in its implementation, likely due to differences in structural characteristics and organisational processes. Both quality and efficiency-enhancing DP processes are particularly important in the context of cardiovascular disease, which is the leading cause of mortality and a major contributor to healthcare costs in Germany. The ‘Ready to Discharge’ (R2D) project investigates the implementation status, influencing factors and outcomes of DP in cardiac units of German hospitals. By integrating quantitative and qualitative data, we aim to identify best practices and provide actionable recommendations for improving DP processes.

A mixed-methods study design will be used. Quantitative analyses will be based on primary data from hospital and patient surveys combined with secondary data from health insurance claims and hospital quality reports. Key outcome measures will include healthcare utilisation outcomes (eg, readmissions, emergency department visits), patient health status outcomes (eg, patient satisfaction, self-rated health) and medication-related outcomes (eg, medication adherence). Qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals will enrich the findings by providing insights into barriers and facilitators to DP.

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Bergische University of Wuppertal and the German Federal Office for Social Security. Informed consent will be obtained for all primary data collections. Hospital managing directors will be informed prior to the hospital survey and will be able to withdraw consent. Patients can withdraw their consent at any time. Secondary data will be analysed in pseudonymised form to ensure patient confidentiality. Results will be disseminated through workshops, regional and international conferences and peer-reviewed publications.