BMJ Open Quality

Background Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) is a core strategy for strengthening health systems, yet documentation and monitoring of CQI activities remain fragmented in many low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings. In Jamaica, CQI has been institutionalized across priority programs, but it largely relies on paper-based tools and basic digital platforms that limit timely learning and oversight. To address these gaps, Jamaicas Ministry of Health and Wellness (MOHW), in collaboration with the Caribbean Training and Education Centre for Health (C-TECH), adapted a web-based CQI application using a participatory, human-centered design approach. Methods We conducted a formative, convergent mixed-methods evaluation across 24 healthcare facilities to assess early-stage implementation of the CQI app. Guided by the Implementation Outcomes Framework, we examined acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and feasibility. Quantitative data were collected through a structured survey of healthcare workers (n=43), and qualitative data were gathered through five focus group discussions (n=33) and three key informant interviews with CQI leads. Survey data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative data were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis. Findings were integrated using joint displays. Results Survey findings indicated moderate to high perceived acceptability and appropriateness of the CQI app, with 70% of participants reporting that it saved time and 67% noting that it aligned with facility goals. However, 19% reported never using it. Qualitative findings highlighted the apps value for improving CQI documentation, visualizing trends, and supporting supervisory oversight. Key barriers to sustained adoption included inconsistent internet connectivity, limited follow-up training, unclear team roles, and challenges integrating app use into routine workflows. Leadership engagement and alignment with existing CQI structures emerged as critical enablers. Conclusion This formative evaluation suggests that a digitally enabled CQI platform can strengthen documentation and oversight of quality improvement activities in resource-constrained health systems when embedded within supportive organizational and infrastructural contexts. Addressing foundational system readiness, including leadership engagement, capacity-building, and workflow integration, will be essential to realizing the CQI apps potential in Jamaica and similar LMIC settings.

Background Therapeutic empathy improves patient and practitioner outcomes, yet existing measures are often lengthy, conceptually inconsistent, and cannot be easily compared across respondent groups. Brief, universal measures (usable by patients, practitioners, students, and observers) are lacking. We therefore developed a universal single-item scale and conducted psychometric testing of the patient-reported version. Methods Following best-practice, we used a three-phase approach: (1) item development; (2) pre-testing the scale by obtaining expert panel feedback (n=9) and conducting cognitive interviews with stakeholders (n=35); and (3) scale validation in an international patient sample (n=521) assessing convergent, discriminant, and known-groups validity. Validation involved assessing correlations with the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure and clinical neutrality measure, and by assessing differences in scores by patient ethnicity. Results We developed two versions (pictorial and text-based) of each scale. Expert feedback and cognitive interviews confirmed content and face validity. Pictorial and text-based versions showed high convergent validity with the CARE measure (r=0.761 and r=0.838, both p<0.001), and discriminant validity with a clinical neutrality measure (r=0.131 and r=0.139, p=0.003 and p=0.001, respectively). Correlations with the CARE measure remained high (r>0.70) and statistically significant (p<0.001) across patient gender, ethnicity, and practitioner type. Ethnic minority patients rated practitioner empathy lower than White patients (pictorial p=0.057; text-based p=0.033), demonstrating known-groups validity. Patients rated doctors' empathy higher than other healthcare practitioners' (p=0.001 for both pictorial and text-based); there were no significant differences in empathy scores by patient gender. Conclusions We developed the first universal single-item therapeutic empathy measure and demonstrated validity for the patient-reported versions. The scale is brief, accessible, and applicable to clinical practice, education, and research. Further research should validate practitioner-, student-, and observer-reported versions, and assess predictive and cross-cultural validity. This robust tool can support patient-reported routine measurement of therapeutic empathy and contribute to improving patient and practitioner outcomes.

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an increasing cause of morbidity and mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) but is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. To address this gap, the Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Myocardial Infarction Care (MIMIC) was developed and implemented in the emergency department (ED) of a regional referral center in northern Tanzania. We conducted in-depth interviews with 20 key stakeholders (physicians, nurses, administrators, and patients) who participated in MIMIC during the first year of implementation. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a broad range of participants. Interviews were guided by a semi-structured interview guide informed by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed by a team of coders using an inductive, grounded theory approach guided by the seven TFA domains. Nineteen major themes emerged across all TFA domains. Overall, participants described MIMIC as highly acceptable, minimally burdensome, and well-aligned with professional and ethical values. Perceived effectiveness was most emphasized, with staff citing improvements in AMI recognition, ECG and troponin testing, and use of evidence-based therapies. All components were highlighted as effective and easily integrated into existing workflows. Patients valued the educational pamphlet for improving knowledge and self-efficacy, though staff expressed concerns about distributing it during acute care, contributing to inconsistent delivery. Champions were viewed as key in promoting adherence and sustaining implementation of the intervention. MIMIC was widely acceptable in all seven TFA domains among ED providers and patients, with perceived effectiveness driving positive attitudes across stakeholder groups. Use of a co-design approach in MIMIC development likely contributed to high intervention acceptability. Patient education strategies may require adaptation to improve fidelity. These findings suggest that continued implementation and future adaptation of MIMIC may be feasible.

Objectives: Endometriosis affects approximately 10% of reproductive age women worldwide, yet care pathways remain fragmented and treatments have limitations. This study aimed to identify and categorize key stakeholders in endometriosis care in Ireland, assess their influence and interest in the digital health initiative, and identify drivers and barriers affecting uptake of innovative approaches to care. Methods: A virtual stakeholder mapping workshop was conducted with participants from healthcare, policy, education, technology, academia, and patient communities. Using a structured MS Teams Whiteboard, participants generated a stakeholder list, positioned stakeholders on an Influence-Interest Matrix, and provided qualitative insights on factors enabling or constraining engagement with digital health innovation. Results: Stakeholders were distributed across all four quadrants of the matrix. High-interest/high-influence stakeholders included the HSE, specialist centres, general practitioners, and the Endometriosis Association of Ireland. High-interest/low-influence groups comprised patients, families, and online communities, while policymakers, hospital managers, and the education sector were identified as high-influence but low-interest actors. Key drivers included strong patient advocacy, institutional support such as engagement from the HSE, and growing awareness of digital health tools. Major barriers encompassed prolonged diagnostic delays, resource constraints, gaps in clinical knowledge, technology anxiety, and challenges sustaining engagement. Conclusions: Stakeholder mapping provided an evidence-informed foundation for the VendoR project, revealing engagement gaps and leverage points critical for improving endometriosis care innovation. The findings highlight the need for intentional, well-resourced strategies that elevate patient voices, address systemic barriers, and ensure balanced representation, supporting the co-design, co-creation, and co-production of digital health interventions for sustainable, patient-centred care.

Purpose: High clinical workload is associated with worse patient and hospital outcomes and is a well-established driver of clinician burnout. Trainees may be particularly exposed, shouldering both clinical and educational responsibilities. Evidence-based work design offers a data-driven approach to healthcare work but relies on robust workload measurements. Trainee workload remains poorly characterized, as commonly used metrics (e.g., duty hours, patient census) overlook cognitive and contextual dimensions. This pilot evaluated the feasibility of combining survey-based and electronic health record (EHR) data to characterize internal medicine (IM) trainee workload. Methods: A pilot study was conducted including IM and Medicine-Pediatrics residents (postgraduate years 1-4) between March 31 and June 22, 2025. Participants completed daily surveys during a seven-day inpatient schedule assessing workload and work experience domains, including environment, professional fulfillment, psychological safety, autonomy, and rounding experience, using validated instruments where available. Concurrently, EHR data captured chart review, documentation, orders, and secure messaging activity. Associations between survey and EHR data were assessed. Results: Among 37 eligible residents, 28 (76%) participated in the pilot capturing 166 shifts. Trainees spent 4.4 +/- 1.6 (mean +/- SD) minutes completing daily surveys and 8.6 +/- 2.3 minutes completing the final survey. Trainees reported working 11.6 +/- 1.0 hours/day and a median census of 9.0 (IQR 6.0-11.0). NASA-TLX score was 50.8 +/- 12.6. Positive shift ratings were associated with lower NASA-TLX scores and perceived rounding length. First-to-last EHR login duration was 15 +/- 2 hours/day, and EHR data showed 204 +/- 46 active minutes/day. Login duration correlated with self-reported hours (r=0.43, p<0.0001), and notes signed correlated with self-reported team (r=0.19, p=0.013) and personal census (r=0.34, p<0.0001). Conclusions: Integrating survey-based and EHR-derived workload measures provides multidimensional insight into trainee work. This novel approach supports scalable measurement and evidence-based work design interventions to improve trainee well-being, education, and clinical efficiency.

Safety net healthcare delivery organizations (SNOs) serve vulnerable populations but face persistent challenges in adopting new technologies, including AI. While systematic barriers to technology adoption in SNOs are well documented, little is known about how AI is implemented in these settings. This study explored real-world AI adoption in SNOs, focusing on identifying barriers encountered across the AI lifecycle and strategies used to overcome them. Five SNOs in the U.S. participated in a 12-month technical assistance program, the Practice Network, to implement AI tools of their choosing. Observed barriers and mitigation strategies were documented throughout program activities and, at the conclusion of the program, reviewed and refined with participants using a participatory research approach to ensure findings reflected lived experiences and organizational contexts. Key barriers emerged during the Integration and Lifecycle Management phases and included gaps in AI performance evaluation and impact assessments, communication with patients about AI use, foundational AI education, financial resources for purchasing and maintaining AI tools, and AI governance structures. Effective strategies for addressing these barriers were primarily supported through centralized expertise, structured guidance, and peer learning. These findings provide granular, actionable insights for SNO leaders, offering guidance for anticipating barriers and proactively planning mitigation strategies. By including SNO perspectives, the study also contributes to the broader health AI ecosystem and underscores the importance of participatory, collaborative approaches to support safe, effective, and ethical AI adoption in resource-constrained settings. Author SummarySafety net organizations (SNOs) are healthcare systems that primarily serve low-income and underinsured patients. While interest in artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has grown rapidly, little is known about how these organizations experience AI adoption in practice. In this study, we partnered with five SNOs over a 12-month program to document the challenges they encountered when implementing AI tools and the strategies they used to address them. We worked closely with SNO staff throughout the process to ensure our findings reflected their lived experiences with AI implementation. We found that the most common challenges arose when organizations tried to integrate AI into daily operations and monitor and maintain those tools over time. Specific barriers included difficulty evaluating whether AI was performing as expected, limited guidance on communicating with patients about AI use, a lack of resources for staff training, limited financial resources, and the absence of formal governance structures. Successful strategies for overcoming these challenges drew on shared knowledge and structured support provided by the program, as well as learning from peer organizations. These findings offer practical guidance for SNO leaders planning or managing AI adoption, and contribute to a broader conversation about what is required to implement AI safely and effectively in healthcare settings that serve the most medically and socially vulnerable patients.

BackgroundDigital health plays an indispensable role in facilitating data analysis and use for enhancing healthcare delivery across health settings. However, there is scant information on the extent to which digital health influences the improvement of primary health services delivery through data use. This study examined the determinants that influence the use of digital health to improve health service delivery in council hospitals in Tanzania. MethodsA cross-sectional design was employed in six regions, involving 12 council hospitals. We used a self-administered questionnaire to collect data from 203 members of hospital quality improvement teams. Descriptive analysis was used to determine the frequency, proportion, and mean of responses, while bootstrapping analysis was conducted to test the statistically significant influence of digital health factors on data use for improving health service delivery. ResultsResults show moderate agreement on data compatibility for planning and decision-making, with 40.4% of respondents agreeing it supports ordering commodities, 43.8% for staff allocation, and 38.4% for planning. However, dissatisfaction was higher for user-friendliness (47.8%), reliability (up to 65.5%), and usefulness (up to 63.5%). Overall, 50.2% (M=2.74{+/-}0.87) disagreed that digital systems effectively support data use. Structural model analysis confirmed significant positive influence of usefulness ({beta}=0.199, p<0.001) and access to quality data ({beta}=0.729, p<0.001) on data use, which strongly impacted service delivery ({beta}=0.593, p<0.001), despite some factors showing no direct influence. ConclusionThe study finds that current digital health initiatives only modestly improve the user-friendliness, reliability, and usefulness of data systems, partly due to fragmented, non-interoperable platforms that burden data management. However, compatibility, usability, reliability, and usefulness of digital tools significantly enhance access to quality data and data-driven decisions. The study recommends strengthening and integrating existing systems and providing continuous digital health training to institutionalize data-informed decision-making.

Background Regulatory inconsistency across African countries contributes to duplicative scientific assessments, prolonged approval timelines, and delayed access to essential medical products. To inform the operationalisation of the African Medicines Agency (AMA), the African Medicines Regulatory Harmonisation (AMRH) programme implemented Africa's first continental pilot study for the scientific evaluation and listing of human medicinal products. This study evaluates the pilot's procedural performance and examines how continental scientific opinions were translated into national regulatory decisions through reliance mechanisms. Methods and Findings A mixed-methods programme evaluation was conducted using regulatory datasets generated during the pilot study. Quantitative data included assessment timelines, GMP inspection outcomes and national post-listing regulatory actions. Retrospective qualitative thematic analysis was applied to governance documents and National Regulatory Authority (NRA) feedback to identify legal, institutional and procedural determinants influencing uptake. Of 64 expressions of interest, 24 products progressed to full evaluation and 12 received positive continental scientific opinions. Ten met the predefined performance target of [&le;]210 working days. Twenty-four GMP inspections identified no critical deficiencies and aligned with global regulatory benchmarks. National uptake demonstrated active reliance: full reliance (continental opinion as primary basis for national approval) for 7 products (58%); sequential reliance (continental assessment supplemented with targeted national queries) for 3 products (25%); and supplemented national review (separate national assessment undertaken) for 2 products (17%). Products with broader market strategies achieved registration in up to 23 African countries within a median of 77 working days post-listing. Variability in uptake reflected national legal authority, administrative requirements, and applicant submission strategies Conclusions The pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a continent-wide regulatory assessment mechanism capable of producing trusted scientific outputs and enabling reliance-based national decision-making in Africa. While reliance was widely applied, heterogeneity in national procedures and administrative sequencing affected time to national registration. Findings provide empirical evidence to inform the AMA scale-up, highlighting the need for harmonised reliance pathways, streamlined administrative processes, and coordinated digital regulatory infrastructure.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly garnered interest in healthcare, with research showing promise to improve quality, efficiency, and outcomes. Cancer care's multidisciplinary nature and high coordination demands are well positioned to benefit from AI. While attitudes in the uptake of evidence and toward the implementation of AI in medicine has been explored generally, literature remains scarce with specific regards to AI in cancer care. This study sought to understand how perspectives of both patients and professionals are essential for guiding responsible, effective implementation of evidence-based (EB) AI in cancer care. Methods: We conducted a workshop at the 2024 British Columbia (BC) Cancer Summit (Vancouver, Canada). Discussions addressed three guiding questions: concerns, benefits, and priorities for AI in cancer care. Responses from 48 workshop participants (patients and families, AI/computer science/cancer researchers, clinicians and allied health professionals, information technology professionals, healthcare administrators) underwent structured conceptualization by concept mapping, leveraging multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster and subcluster analysis to produce visual and quantitative maps of stakeholder priorities. Results: A total of 265 statements on perceived benefits, concerns, and priorities related to the implementation of AI in cancer care were generated from the workshop and underwent concept mapping. Two clusters were identified; Cluster 1 focused on "Challenges and Safeguards for AI Implementation," and Cluster 2 focused on "Clinical Benefits and Efficiency Gains." Subcluster analysis distinguished 8 thematic subclusters (4 per cluster). Both mean importance (P < .001) and feasibility (P < .001) ratings were significantly higher for Cluster 2. No differences were found between ratings by clinical and nonclinical professionals. Further go-zone analysis classified statements according to their relative superiority/inferiority in importance and feasibility compared to the overall average. Conclusions: Stakeholder ratings were higher for statements describing clinical benefits and efficiency gains than for those describing challenges and safeguards for AI implementation in cancer care. Concept mapping analysis distinguished between workflow-aligned AI applications, perceived as ready for implementation, and system-level governance requirements requiring longer-term investment. Present findings provide a structured, stakeholder-informed framework for prioritizing and sequencing AI implementation efforts in cancer care, constituting a practical blueprint to catalyze meaningful progress.

ObjectiveThis study investigated how hospital murals influence the experiences of patients, healthcare staff, and visitors across four sites. BackgroundEvidence shows that visual art in healthcare settings can improve well-being but few studies focus specifically on murals or compare their effects across cultural contexts. The Hospital Murals Evaluation project addresses this gap through an investigation of murals in hospitals in Nigeria, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. MethodsUsing a mixed methods cross-sectional design, the study integrated surveys, interviews, and participatory photography. A total of 525 unique responses were collected from 229 patients (131 adult, 98 pediatric), 245 staff, 49 visitors, and 2 undisclosed. ResultsInterviews across all three participant groups (n=115) revealed themes of positive affects, perception of care, as well as stress or indifference. Surveys (n=327) showed moderate positive correlations between mural viewing and positive emotions among patients, and between mural exposure and well-being, positive emotions, social connection, and workplace belonging among staff in the UK and USA, with null findings for staff in Nigeria and Slovenia. Participatory photography (n=83) illustrated how murals conveyed comfort, though abstract or poorly placed murals sometimes evoked discomfort. Meta-inferences across the methods indicate that viewing murals were associated with positive emotions for patients and did not induce negative emotions for staff or visitors. ConclusionMurals act as health-promoting infrastructure that can enhance well-being, foster positive experiences, and signal intentions of care. The findings highlight the need for culturally attuned designs to create healthcare environments that nurture well-being.

Introduction Large language models are increasingly being used in healthcare. In interventional pain medicine, clinical reasoning is essential for procedural planning. Prior studies show that simplified prompts reduce clinical detail in AI-generated responses. It remains unclear whether this reflects knowledge loss or simply prompt-driven suppression of information. Methods We performed a controlled comparative study using 15 standardized low back pain questions representing common interventional pain questions. Each question was submitted to ChatGPT under three conditions, professional-level prompt (DP), fourth-grade reading-level prompt (D4), and clinician-directed rewriting of the D4 response to a medical level (U4[-&gt;]MD). No follow-up prompting was allowed. Three physicians independently rated responses for accuracy using a 0-2 ordinal scale. Clinical completeness was determined by consensus. Word count and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) were also measured. Paired t-tests compared conditions. Results Accuracy was highest with professional prompting (1.76). Accuracy declined with the fourth-grade prompt (1.33; p = 0.00086). When simplified responses were rewritten for clinicians, accuracy returned to baseline (1.76; p {approx} 1.00 vs DP). Clinical completeness followed the same pattern showing DP 80.0%, D4 6.7%, U4[-&gt;]MD 73.3%. Fourth-grade responses were shorter and less complex. Upscaled responses were more complex and similar in length to professional responses. Inter-rater reliability was low (Fleiss {kappa} = 0.17), but trends were consistent across conditions. Conclusions Reduced clinical detail under simplified prompts appears to reflect constrained output rather than loss of knowledge. Clinician-directed reframing restores omitted content. LLM performance in interventional pain depends strongly on prompt design and intended audience.

Background: The urgent care departments in Europe face a structural paradox: accelerating digitalisation is accompanied by a patient population that is disproportionately unable to engage with standard digital tools. An internal analysis at the Emergency Department (Akutafdelingen) of Nordsjaellands Hospital in Hilleroed, Denmark found that 43% of emergency patients struggle with digital solutions - a figure that reflects the predictable composition of acute care populations rather than any individual failing. Objective: This paper presents the design, iterative development, and secondary validation of the ED Adaptive Interface (v5): a prototype adaptive patient terminal developed in response to this challenge. The system operationalises what the author terms impairment-first design - a methodology that treats the most constrained patient experience as the primary design problem and derives the standard experience as a subset. The interface configures itself in under ten seconds via nurse-led setup, adapting across four axes of impairment: visual, motor, speech, and cognitive. System: Version 4 supports five accessibility modes, a heatmap pain assessment grid, a Privacy and Dignity panel, a live workflow tracker with care notifications, structured dual-category help requests, and plain-language medical term definitions across four languages. Version 5, reported here for the first time, introduces a Condition Worsening Escalation button, a Referral Pathway Display, a "Why Am I Waiting?" triage explainer, a Symptom Progression Log, MinSP/Yellow Card Scan simulation, expanded language support (seven languages: English, Danish, Arabic with full RTL layout, Turkish, Romanian, Polish, and Somali), and an expanded ten-item Communication Board. The entire system runs as a single 79-kilobyte HTML file with zero infrastructure requirements. Methods: To base the design on patient-generated evidence, two independent social media threads were subjected to an inductive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006): a primary corpus of 83 entries in the Facebook group Foreigners in Denmark (collected March 2026) and a corroborating corpus in an international community group in the Aarhus region (collected April 2026). All identifiers in both datasets were fully anonymised under GDPR Article 89 research provisions prior to analysis. No participants were contacted. Generative AI tools were used to assist with drafting, writing, and prototype code development; all scientific content, data collection, analysis, and conclusions are the sole responsibility of the authors. Results: The first discourse corpus produced five major themes corresponding to the five problem areas the prototype was designed to address: system navigation and triage literacy gaps (31 entries); language and cultural barriers (6 entries); communication failures during care (5 entries); staff overload and capacity constraints (8 entries); and pain and severity assessment failures (14 entries). The corroborating dataset supported all five themes and introduced two additional themes: differential treatment of international patients and medical gaslighting as a long-term pattern of patient advocacy failure. One structural finding - the five most-liked comments incorrectly criticised the original poster for self-referring when she had received explicit 1813 telephone triage approval - directly inspired the Referral Pathway Display and "Why Am I Waiting?" features in v5. Conclusions: The convergence of design rationale and independent social evidence across all five problem categories suggests that impairment-first design is not a niche accessibility concern but a structural approach to healthcare interface quality. The prototype is ready for a structured clinical pilot using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and semi-structured staff interviews. The long-term roadmap includes full MinSP integration, hospital PMS connectivity, and clinical validation.

In this article we argue that intersectoral collaboration is ultimately manifested at the neighbourhood level, where professionals from diverse sectors engage in a joint network to improve population health outcomes. To strengthen intersectoral collaboration in neighbourhoods with low SES, it is crucial to include the community voice, representing diverse citizens who must be heard and engaged in decision-making processes. This study aims to contribute to the literature of intersectoral collaboration by exploring how networks emerge and evolve over time. We focus on the development of the roles of citizens in the professional network and diverse sectoral involvement within a local network of the team called The Connectors, in a neighbourhood with low socioeconomic scores (SESs). Methodologically, we use a combination of social network analysis (SNA) and action research. Results show that the network expanded significantly over time, both in terms of the number of actors and the diversity of sectors involved. At both measurement points T1 and T2, the majority of collaborations occurred across sectoral boundaries. By the second measurement, the proportion of intersectoral relationships had increased. This indicates that as the network expanded, new collaborations were not confined to existing sectoral clusters but increasingly bridged different sectors. The dual role that citizens have taken on during the development of the network, serving both as community voice representatives and professionals, can be empowering, offering pathways for personal growth and career advancement. However, it also introduces complexity, as these individuals may experience tensions between personal commitments and professional responsibilities. To enable network development, policies should allow room beyond standard protocols and organizational silos, as well as provide sufficient time for relationships and structures to mature. Although network building is a gradual and complex process, once established, these networks can play a pivotal role in delivering integrated and responsive care.

Background. People with lived/living experience of health conditions, as well as caregivers, are increasingly engaged in research. This study aimed to develop and pilot test a new tool measuring the impact of lived/living experience engagement on the research. The measure is called the Measure of Engagement Tool for Research and lived Experience (METRE). Method. We conducted a qualitative descriptive study among 28 people with lived/living experience and caregivers and 12 academic researchers to understand the impacts of engagement. Using the findings, we drafted the METRE. We pilot tested the METRE among 13 people with lived/living experience and caregivers and 10 academic researchers. Insights were used to refine the scale. Results. Qualitatively, participants identified multiple domains of impact of engagement on research, which guided scale development. Pilot testing of the draft METRE revealed it being straightforward to complete, providing a thorough evaluation of the impact of engagement. However, some areas of improvement were recommended. The draft items showed acceptable preliminary performance. Conclusions. An assessment tool is now available to assess the impact of lived/living experience engagement on the research. Additional research is required to evaluate its psychometric properties. Tools to evaluate the impact of engagement on research will help advance the science of engagement and support engaged research teams in their work.

Background: Continuous adhesive patch electrocardiographic (ECG) wearables are increasingly prescribed. Patient experience with these devices can influence adherence, but research in this area is limited. This study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of patients receiving wearable cardiac monitoring technology as part of their routine care through the lens of treatment burden. Methods: This was a qualitative study with semi-structured phone interviews conducted between February and May 2024. We recruited participants from primary care and outpatient clinics using maximum variation sampling to ensure diversity in sex, ethnicity, and education levels. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Sixteen participants (mean age 51 years, 63% female) were interviewed (average duration: 33 minutes). Three themes were developed: 1) ?Experience using the device: Burden vs Ease of Use?, which captured participants? perceptions of how easily they could integrate the device in their daily lives; 2) ?Individual variability in responses to ECG self-monitoring? covered participants? emotional and cognitive response to knowing their heart rhythm was monitored; and 3) ?The care process shapes patient experiences? reflected support preferences during the set-up and monitoring period and the uncertainty regarding timely clinical and device feedback. Conclusions: Patients valued cardiac wearables for facilitating diagnosis and felt reassured knowing they were clinically monitored. However, gaps in information provided to patients seemed to cause anxiety for some participants. These concerns could be mitigated through clearer clinician communication and patient education at the time of prescription.

ABSTRACT Background Before obtaining professional medical care, many people in peri-urban and rural Pakistan contact herbalists, spiritual healers, and unlicensed caregivers. This study examined the social, economic, and cultural factors influencing the use of informal care by analysing the health-seeking behaviours of individuals in the Faisalabad District. Methods An exploratory mixed-methods study was conducted in Makkuana and the surrounding villages of Faisalabad District, Punjab. The quantitative component involved a cross-sectional survey of 69 adults using a structured questionnaire adapted from the I-CAM-Q. The qualitative component comprised twelve in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions. Descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis were used for quantitative data. Thematic analysis, guided by the Health Belief Model and Andersen's Behavioural Model, was applied to qualitative data. Results The mean age of participants was 40.4 years; 62.3% were female, and 79.7% had monthly household incomes below PKR 60,000. Of the 69 participants, 68 (98.6%) sought care from an informal provider first, most commonly an unqualified practitioner (50.7%), herbal practitioner (29.0%), or homeopath (17.4%). Trust was the leading reason for provider choice (43.5%), followed by proximity (24.6%) and low cost (15.9%). Complications were reported by 21.7% of participants, and 39.1% later required formal care for the same illness. Eight qualitative themes emerged: structural and economic barriers to formal care; proximity and convenience as determinants of informal care; trust, familiarity, and social networks; cultural and religious normalisation of traditional practices; poor doctor-patient communication in formal settings; perceived safety and naturalness of alternative remedies; awareness deficits about provider qualifications; and treatment-related harm and delayed escalation to formal care. Conclusion Informal health care seeking is nearly universal in this community, driven by intersecting economic, structural, cultural, and interpersonal factors. Enhancing primary care affordability, accessibility, and the quality of provider-patient communication together with culturally sensitive health literacy programs, is essential to redirect care seeking toward qualified providers.

Background: Palliative care services improve quality of life and health outcomes for individuals living with chronic and life-limiting illnesses. Although these services have expanded considerably in urban areas, their availability remains limited in many rural communities. This study aimed to identify key components of integrated palliative care services and examine how these elements are implemented within rural healthcare systems in southern Minnesota. Methods: A qualitative case study using deductive content analysis was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with healthcare professionals involved in palliative and hospice care serving rural communities in southern Minnesota. Results: Participants identified several essential components of integrated palliative care, including multidisciplinary care teams, continuity of care across healthcare settings, interprofessional collaboration, and early identification of patients who may benefit from palliative care. Existing services in southern Minnesota incorporate several integrated elements, such as coordinated care teams, individualized care plans, nurse-led case management, professional training, and the use of virtual visits for geographically distant patients. However, participants also identified important gaps, including limited availability of palliative care services in rural areas, fragmented continuity of care, challenges in early patient identification, funding and insurance barriers, and the absence of a unified palliative care network. Conclusions: While palliative care services in southern Minnesota demonstrate important strengths, further efforts are required to improve service integration, coordination, and access for rural populations. Strengthening integrated PCSs may help reduce disparities in access to care and improve service delivery for rural patients and their families. These findings may inform the development of integrated palliative care models in rural healthcare systems beyond the study setting.

BackgroundLaboratory services are essential to the provision of health service delivery across the world. In resource-constrained settings such as in low- and middle-income countries like Ghana, maintenance of a strong capacity could be more challenging. This study assessed the capacity and gaps in laboratory service delivery in three districts of the Savannah Region of Ghana. MethodsThe WHO laboratory assessment tool (LAT) was adapted to collect data in 10 health facilities based on 11 operational system modules. Data were collected through interviews. Capacity was defined based on a 100-point score scale and interpreted as weak (<50%), moderate (50-80%) and strong (>80%). Differences in median scores were determined using Friedman and Kruska-Wallis tests. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. A scale (0-5) was used to identify the needs of the laboratory. ResultsOverall, capacity score was moderate, mean 50% {+/-} 25.7 with a median score of 52.5%, IQR: 30.0-68.5%. Testing module received the highest score, 71.5%, while document module scored the lowest, 14.5%. Scores did not differ significantly between system components after multiple comparisons, p>adjusted alpha. Hospital-level laboratories performed significantly higher than polyclinics (adjusted p = 0.044) and health centers (adjusted p<0.001). The biggest needs were biosafety, equipment maintenance, human and financial resources (median gap score: 3-4). ConclusionThe laboratory capacity in the health system of the Savannah Region was moderate, requiring improvements in all operational areas. The biggest needs include safety, equipment, human and financial support systems. Addressing these critical gaps would have direct impact on public health and patient outcomes.

Background The Precision rEsearCh pArticipatioN (PECAN) study aims to explore factors that influence perceptions of precision health research participation, focusing on diverse communities in South Carolina. The objective is to identify both positive and negative factors affecting participation, enabling the development of strategies to enhance understanding and reduce barriers, particularly within a population facing significant health disparities. Methods To ensure the effectiveness of the survey instrument for the PECAN study, researchers conducted a cognitive study through guided group discussions with community members. These discussions were designed to pinpoint survey questions that participants found difficult to understand, hard to answer, or unclear. The insights gained from this cognitive evaluation were used to refine and improve the survey, ensuring it is clear, uniform, and effective for gathering meaningful data. Results The cognitive interview study identified several survey items that participants found challenging or ambiguous, particularly due to complex wording, culturally irrelevant content, and questions requiring extensive recall. Participants emphasized the need for clearer language, reassurance about anonymity, and the use of biological terms, as well as greater cultural representation. Based on this feedback, researchers revised the survey to simplify language, provide contextual disclaimers about specimen collection, depersonalize genetic testing questions, and restructure redundant items. Conclusions The cognitive interview study was instrumental in enhancing the PECAN survey's clarity and effectiveness. By addressing participants' feedback, the researchers were able to create a more accessible survey instrument. These improvements are expected to facilitate better data collection, ultimately contributing to a deeper understanding of factors influencing precision health research participation among diverse populations. This methodology highlights the importance of participant feedback in developing research tools that are both inclusive and effective.

A Wearable Monitoring System (WMS), comprising a chest patch, wrist-worn pulse oximeter, and arm-worn blood pressure device, was developed in preparation for a pilot Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) on a UK surgical ward. The system was designed to support continuous physiological monitoring and early detection of deterioration. An initial prototype user interface was developed by the research team based on prior clinical experience and engineering knowledge. To ensure suitability for clinical practice, iterative user-centred refinement was undertaken through a series of clinician focus groups and wearability assessments. Six focus groups were conducted between November 2019 and May 2021 involving multidisciplinary healthcare professionals. Feedback from these sessions informed successive interface and system modifications. System development spanned the COVID-19 pandemic, during which the WMS was rapidly adapted and deployed to support clinical care on isolation wards. Feedback obtained during this period was incorporated into later versions of the system and provided a unique opportunity to examine changes in clinician priorities under pandemic conditions. Clinicians consistently prioritised alert visibility, alarm fatigue mitigation, parameter flexibility, and centralised monitoring. Notably, preferences regarding alert modality and access mechanisms evolved over time: early enthusiasm for mobile or smartphone-type devices shifted towards a preference for fixed, ward-based displays and audible alerts at the nurses station following pandemic deployment. Building on previous wearability testing in healthy volunteers, wearability testing using a validated questionnaire was completed by 169 patient participants during the RCT. The chest patch and pulse oximeter demonstrated high tolerability, whereas the blood pressure cuff showed poor wearability and was removed from the final system. These findings demonstrate the importance of iterative, clinician-led design for wearable WMS and highlight how extreme clinical contexts such as the COVID-19 pandemic can significantly reshape perceived requirements for safety-critical monitoring technologies.