BMJ Open Quality

Background: Patient satisfaction is a key measure of healthcare quality among people experiencing homelessness. Student-run free clinics (SRFCs) provide care to underserved populations, but the role of student involvement in patient satisfaction remains unclear. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients receiving care at an SRFC. From February 2024 to February 2025, patients completed post-visit surveys assessing satisfaction that were evaluated using regression analyses. Results: Eighty-eight patients completed surveys, reporting high overall satisfaction (mean 9.26/10). In separate linear regression models adjusted for age, gender, and race, greater perceived benefit of student involvement was associated with higher satisfaction ({beta} = .298, p = .037), whereas perceiving the visit as too long was associated with lower satisfaction ({beta} = -.285, p = .019). Conclusion: Greater perceived benefit of student involvement was associated with higher patient satisfaction, whereas longer perceived visit duration was associated with lower satisfaction. These findings highlight the importance of balancing educational opportunities with efficient workflows in SRFCs.

Awareness of comorbidities in people with dementia is vital context for dementia research and clinical management. Natural Language Processing (NLP) applied to free text in the electronic health record (EHR) may help ascertain comorbidity presence. Our aim was to assess the validity of the MedCAT Comorbidity NLP app in a cohort of people with dementia. We used text from the EHR of South London and Maudsley NHS Mental Health Trust via Clinical Records Interactive Search (CRIS), linked to structured data from local primary care (Lambeth DataNet) and hospital admission data in a cohort of 3,543 people with dementia. We evaluated MedCAT Comorbidity, examining internal validity via manual review of text and external validity by cross-validation against linked primary care and hospital data; and comparison of the predictive value of comorbidity measures for mortality. Internal precision was highest for atrial fibrillation (100%) and lowest for diabetes (78%). Cross-validation with linked data varied substantially across conditions, with precision from 96% to 59% and recall 77% to 4%. The median number of comorbidities identified was two using any single source, or three when combined. MedCAT Comorbidity demonstrated predictive ability for mortality (HR 1.11 per condition), although the model fit was better using comorbidity from hospital admission data. In people with dementia, the MedCAT Comorbidity app showed high precision for most conditions during internal validation. The variability of precision and recall on external validity assessment partly reflects incomplete documentation. Results from the MedCAT comorbidity app can assist researchers in understanding comorbidity of cohorts, particularly when primary care or hospital data is not available. Our findings highlight the need to develop quality assurance protocols that include internal and external validity checks before deploying general data extraction apps for specific clinical subpopulations.

Background: Although point-of-care testing is the standard method for inpatient glucose monitoring; it is associated with patient discomfort and late detection of dysglycaemic events. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) may improve glycaemic management; however, limited staff education and experience among may hinder its implementation. Aim: To investigate experience, perceptions and training needs on CGM use among inpatient nursing staff across diverse hospital wards. Methods: This is a single-centre, 38-item online survey recruited inpatient nurses in a hospital in the UK. Participants were invited via the e-newsletter and posters; the survey remained open for five months. Results: Nineteen nurses reported positive perceptions of inpatient CGM. Most considered CGM reliable (77.8%) and preferred CGM combined with POCT (66.7%). Views on its impact on workload and patient-room entries were mixed (30% agreed, 30% disagreed). Training needs included sensor placement (92.9%) and alarm management (78.6%). Conclusion: Nurses viewed CGM favourably but highlighted important training needs for inpatient use.

Introduction: Primary care electronic health records (EHRs) are an important resource for health research, but death recording in primary care EHRs may be incomplete or differ from Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registrations. We used OpenSAFELY-TPP to assess the completeness and concordance of death recording and provide recommendations for using date-of-death information. Methods: Using linked primary care EHRs and ONS death registrations, we assessed whether ONS-registered deaths from 2020-2025 had a primary care date of death and, where present, calculated the difference between dates. Where a primary care date was absent, we assessed death-related SNOMED CT codes. Analyses were conducted overall and by year, population subgroup, and general practice. We also examined GP registration end dates and primary-care-recorded deaths without a corresponding ONS record, including monthly patterns near the data extraction date. Results: Among 1,409,275 ONS-registered deaths, 88% had the same date recorded in primary care and 8% had no corresponding primary care date. Among 1,324,995 deaths recorded in primary care, <2% had no corresponding ONS record. Deaths recorded in only one source were more frequent among people aged <45 years and those from Mixed, Asian or Asian British, Black or Black British, and Chinese or Other ethnic groups. ONS-only dates were also more frequent in London and the West Midlands. Primary-care-only deaths increased close to date of data extraction, reaching 7% in February 2026. Same-day GP deregistration increased from 9% in 2020 to 85% in 2025. Conclusions: Death recording in primary care EHRs showed high completeness and concordance with ONS registrations, but discrepancies remained for recent deaths and some population groups. Data recency and population-specific completeness should therefore be considered when using linked mortality data for research.

Summary Background We used sequential target trial emulation (TTE) to examine associations between opioid analgesic initiation and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes while accounting for gestational timing, time at risk, and potential confounding. Methods Using the Early Life Course platform, comprising linked population-based data for births in New South Wales, Australia (2013-2019), we emulated a new trial at each gestational week, comparing women who initiated a prescribed opioid analgesic with eligible non-initiators. Baseline covariates were balanced using inverse probability weighting. Weighted logistic regression estimated odds ratios (ORs) for neonatal outcomes, postpartum haemorrhage, and severe maternal morbidity. Pooled logistic regression estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for other maternal outcomes, combined across gestational weeks using fixed-effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses assessed unmeasured confounding, exposure misclassification, and potential reverse causation. Findings Among 511,357 pregnancies, over 80% of opioid initiators received only one dispensing. Opioid initiation was not associated with increased risks of placental abruption (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.75-1.16), severe maternal morbidity (OR 1.05, 0.97-1.11), postpartum haemorrhage (OR 0.98, 0.95-1.02), low Apgar score (OR 0.99, 0.87-1.08), small for gestational age (OR 0.90, 0.85-0.95), or neonatal abstinence syndrome (OR 0.98, 0.72-1.30). Risks were elevated for PPROM (HR 1.10, 0.98-1.23), preterm birth (HR 1.26, 1.19-1.33), severe neonatal morbidity (OR 1.08, 1.02-1.17), and perinatal death (OR 1.29, 1.10-1.52). Perinatal death estimates attenuated in analyses addressing potential reverse causation. Interpretation Using a TTE approach that accounted for gestational timing and time at risk, we found no appreciable increase in most maternal or neonatal outcomes following predominantly short-term opioid initiation. Elevated risks of preterm birth, perinatal death, and third-trimester PPROM may reflect causal effects or confounding by pregnancy-related indications. Studies using time-appropriate designs and detailed information on prescribing indications and their timing are needed to clarify these associations.

Purpose Prescribing to lactating women is constrained by limited evidence. Published compatibility classifications provide clinical guidance and a discrete research comparator. How often prescribing diverges from that guidance, and what characteristics are associated with divergence, is unknown at national scale. Methods Retrospective analysis of prescriptions filled during lactation, identified in the 2012-2014 MarketScan Commercial Claims Database. Prescriptions were classified as concordant (Hale's lactation risk category L1-L3) or discordant (L4-L5). Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with concordance. Results Of 96,484 new prescriptions, 95,710 (99.2%) were concordant and 774 (0.8%) were discordant. Discordant prescriptions were filled later after delivery (median 59 vs 33 days) and had a day supply three times longer (30 vs 10 days). In multivariable analysis (N=28,732), concordant prescriptions were associated with maternal age under 35 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.75) and chronic-condition medications (aOR=10.94, 95% CI: 6.47-18.50), and were less likely within 14 days of delivery (aOR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.38-0.73) and with each additional day of supply (aOR=0.96, 95% CI: 0.96-0.96). Compared with family practice, concordance did not differ for obstetric, internal medicine, or emergency medicine prescriptions, but prescriptions from other provider types had lower odds of concordance (aOR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.79). Conclusions Prescribing during lactation was overwhelmingly concordant with published compatibility guidance; the rare divergence was patterned by prescription and prescriber characteristics. Because the categories are an expert classification rather than consensus guidance, divergence should not be read as inappropriate prescribing.

Background: Ambient artificial-intelligence (AI) scribes are being deployed beyond medicine into allied-health practice, but comparative evidence mainly concerns physician documentation. Objective: To compare quality and transcript-grounded clinical-risk error burden of AI-generated and allied health professional notes from identical simulated consultations. Methods: Paired simulation across dietetics, physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy (five consultations each; 20 pairs; 40 notes). Heidi generated an unedited first-draft note and a professional documented each encounter. Professionals rated PDQI-9 quality. Professional and automated review identified unsupported statements and omissions; two language models graded clinical risk. Co-primary outcomes were PDQI-9 score and Critical+High error density. Results: Mean PDQI-9 scores were 38.45 and 35.05 for AI and professional notes (paired difference +3.40, 95% CI +0.01 to +6.79; Wilcoxon p=0.042; dz=0.47). The Bayesian estimate was +3.47 (94% equal-tailed credible interval +0.66 to +6.30; P[AI>professional]=0.989). Automated-reviewer all-error density was 3.35 vs 8.55 per note (professional-minus-AI difference 5.20, 95% CI 3.85 to 6.55); omission density was 1.45 vs 5.20 (difference 3.75, 2.80 to 4.65). Critical+High density was 0.35 vs 0.75 (difference 0.40, -0.10 to 1.00). The pooled quality result was driven principally by dietetics. Conclusions: AI-generated notes achieved modestly higher pooled quality and fewer transcript-grounded errors, chiefly omissions; serious-error evidence was inconclusive. Small discipline samples and incomplete ground truth preclude safety or discipline-wide superiority claims.

Introduction Cancer incidence is rising rapidly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where diagnostic pathology capacity is constrained. AI applied to routine histopathology could strengthen diagnostic capacity and offer leapfrogging potential by embedding AI into diagnostic systems as they are built up. However, without empirically identifying implementation determinants in LMIC cancer-diagnostic settings, AI solutions risk being poorly aligned with local constraints, limiting impact or exacerbating existing disparities. Methods We conducted an exploratory mixed-methods pilot study across three phases: 1) a structured survey characterising the diagnostic and technical landscape and AI priorities; 2) focus group discussions (FGDs) to inductively identify implementation determinants and 3) a second survey quantifying FGD-derived themes. Twelve physicians were purposively recruited (10 from LMIC, 2 from high-income countries for reference) and findings integrated through narrative triangulation. Results There was substantial heterogeneity in diagnostic and AI infrastructure that did not track consistently with country income classification. H&E staining was universally available, immunohistochemistry capacity was rudimentary at 7 of 10 sites and molecular testing absent or minimal at 6 of 10 sites. Whole-slide-imaging scanners were available at 8 of 10 sites, while graphical processing units, required for efficient AI inference, were available at only 4 of 10 sites. The participants would prioritise use of AI for cancer screening, cancer diagnosis, and biomarker prediction from H&E slides. Six implementation determinants were identified: AI literacy, governance frameworks, funding, evidence generation, clinical deployment, and collaboration. Financial constraints emerged as the dominant barrier across all determinants, and collaboration as an important enabling mechanism. Conclusion AI implementation readiness in LMIC cancer-diagnostic settings is highly heterogeneous and cannot be inferred from income classification, underscoring the need for institution-level assessment. Realising the leapfrogging potential of AI in this context requires coordinated progress across all determinants, with sustainable financing, and collaboration enabling the remaining determinants.

Background: The first thousand days are a sensitive window for child health and social health inequalities. When routine care falls short, parents of young children turn to online sources and, recently, to generative artificial intelligence (AI). Evidence on their concerns, child-health literacy, and AI use is scarce. Objective: To describe health informational needs and concerns, child-health literacy, and use of AI for child-health questions, including differences by parental role and parity, among parents of young children. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, two anonymous self-administered online questionnaires were disseminated through a digital health application between May 12 and June 11, 2026, to French-speaking parents of at least one child aged 0 to 47 months in France. Questionnaire 1 covered unmet information needs, concerns across 16 topics, perceived intra-couple concordance, and confidence in routine care. Questionnaire 2 covered a four-item child-health literacy quiz and AI use (frequency, topics, 12-month trend, barriers, trust conditions, perceived effect on consultations, and disclosure). Results: In total, 12,634 parents responded (Questionnaire 1, n=5,410; Questionnaire 2, n=7,224), mostly mothers (94.6% and 92.9%). Most (61.8%) had searched for information without finding a clear, reliable answer, selecting a median of 4 (Interquartile range [IQR] 3-7) over 16 topics. Leading concerns were sleep (51.3%), nutrition (48.1%), and education (i.e., upbringing and behavior) (47.8%). Mothers were nearly twice as likely as fathers to select accident prevention (26.5% vs 16.3%) and parental mental health (38.7% vs 28.6%); first-time parents selected most topics more often than experienced parents, most markedly dental hygiene (43.8% vs 27.6%). The median child-health literacy score was 3 (IQR 3-4) on a 0-to-4 quiz, with 19.9% of parents scoring 2 or below; tooth-brushing age was the weakest item (68.4% correct). Mothers outscored fathers on every item. More than half of parents (54.2%) had used AI for a child-health question, 11.2% weekly; among those reporting a trend, 68.3% had increased AI use for child-health questions over the year and 6.2% decreased it. The main barriers to AI use were a preference for professionals (55.9%) and reliability concerns (48.7%); trust depended most on medical oversight of the tool (76.6%). AI use appeared additive, with 66.8% reporting no change in healthcare visit frequency. One third (35.5%) had told an AI something shared with neither a professional nor their network, rising to 64.1% among regular users. Conclusions: Parental informational needs were widespread and frequently unmet. AI has become a common and fast-rising source for child-health questions, at times a confidential one, used alongside rather than instead of professionals. Child-health literacy was generally high but uneven, with oral health the clearest gap. Strengths include the sample size and early-generative-AI timing; limitations include the cross-sectional design, self-report, digital-recruitment selection bias, and the small proportion of fathers.

Objective: To estimate Long COVID undercoding in electronic health records (EHRs) against federal survey prevalence, and to evaluate a predictor of later coding that anyone can rebuild from counts a research enclave releases. Materials and Methods: Among 23,790 All of Us adults with COVID-19, we compared coded shares with Household Pulse Survey prevalence. Among 23,300 adults uncoded at day 90, we predicted a first U09.9 code by day 455. We fitted naive Bayes and linear discriminant models outside the enclave from released counts and compared them with an elastic net fitted inside to the same patients and features. Tests were a random 20% of patients (4,680, 50 coded) and 18 held-out EHR sites (5,760, 60 coded). Results: Under survey-comparability assumptions, about 1 in 9 adults who ever had Long COVID carried its code, and the women-to-men coding ratio was 0.79 (95% sensitivity interval, 0.65-0.95). The released models' areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) were 0.68 (95% CI, 0.60-0.75) on the patient test and 0.64 (0.55-0.72) at held-out sites, 0.049 (0.001-0.104) above the elastic net. On the patient test, the elastic net had a higher area under the precision-recall curve (difference 0.062, 0.003-0.122). Released probabilities overestimated coding risk at held-out sites. Discussion: Fitting from released counts did not consistently lower discrimination. Coded outcomes inform disease discrimination only under stated coding assumptions. Conclusion: Long COVID is substantially and unevenly undercoded, and a model rebuilt from public counts predicts its later coding with moderate discrimination.

Objective: To determine how cohort versus nested case-control (NCC) design affects EHR-based prediction of a rare outcome. Materials and Methods: We compared two cohort and five NCC designs for predicting early-onset gastrointestinal cancer using L1-regularized logistic regression (LASSO), XGBoost, and multilayer perceptron (MLP). Models underwent nested five-fold cross-validation with model-specific hyperparameter tuning and temporal evaluation in a held-out prospective cohort representing intended deployment. Model discrimination was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC). Model calibration was assessed using Brier scores and calibration plots before and after recalibration with isotonic regression. Feature-ranking similarity was quantified using rank-biased overlap. Results: The cohort development datasets included 256,854-415,529 patients, with 2-yr cumulative incidence of 0.12%-0.17%, compared with approximately 9% in the 1:10 matched NCC datasets. NCC designs generally produced higher internal discrimination, but temporal performance varied by algorithm and index-date definition. Cohort designs achieved the highest temporal AUPRC for LASSO (0.068), whereas diagnosis-anchored NCC achieved the highest temporal AUPRC for XGBoost (0.086) and MLP (0.070). Temporal AUPRC generally decreased as the required lead time before diagnosis increased. Raw predicted probabilities substantially overestimated observed risks in the temporal cohort. Isotonic recalibration improved probability scaling while largely preserving discrimination, although residual miscalibration remained. Cohort-based feature rankings were more consistent across algorithms, whereas NCC-based rankings depended more strongly on algorithm and index-date anchoring. Conclusion: Study design should be selected and evaluated according to the intended clinical prediction task and deployment setting.

Background Emergency Department (ED) overcrowding is associated with adverse outcomes including delays to treatment, patients leaving without being seen and increased mortality. Increasingly, evidence suggests that crowding may disproportionately affect those of lower socioeconomic status, worsening health inequalities. This study investigates the relationship between prolonged ED length of stay and vulnerable patient groups choosing not to wait to be seen. Methods A retrospective cohort study analysed monthly ED attendance data from a large district general hospital between January 2020 and July 2025. Patients who did not wait to be seen (DNW) were assessed for vulnerability based on age, presenting complaint and inferred frailty. Associations were explored using generalised estimation equation model with binary outcome. Results During the 66-month study period, 317,978 patients attended the ED, of whom 35,403 (11.1%) did not wait to be seen. Of these, just under one third met vulnerability criteria. As the percentage of patients staying in the ED for more than 8-hours increased, so did the proportion of patients leaving the department without being seen. With each 10% increase in LOS>8h percentage, the odds of any patient choosing not to wait increases by 48% (OR=1.48, 95% CI(1.47 to 1.49), p<0.001). Of the three vulnerability groups assessed, paediatric patients, those presenting with mental health complaints and frailty, frail patients were the most affected when lengths of stay in the ED increased and crowding became a problem (OR=1.73, 95% CI(1.72 to 1.74), p<0.001). Conclusion These findings demonstrate that while all patient groups are more likely to leave without being seen as crowding worsens, elderly and paediatric patient cohorts are significantly more likely to leave without being seen as crowding worsens. This raises genuine concerns about the accessibility of healthcare, in the presence of crowding, in these vulnerable groups.

Background. Regulatory pressure to avoid confusingly similar drug names appears to have pushed manufacturers to coin more distinctive proprietary names, but no one has quantitatively analyzed this trend. Objective. To determine whether proprietary drug names became more orthographically distinctive (unusual in spelling) over time. Methods. We examined 1,321 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) new molecular entity (NME) names (1985-2024), 2,769 FDA Orange Book trade names (1982-2026), 177,337 US pharmaceutical trademarks (1980-2026), and 1,273 generic names (1982-2025). Compared to prior names (including those already marketed) and ordinary English, we scored each name's character trigram (three-letter sequence) surprisal (statistical unexpectedness) and its edit-distance similarity to the closest existing names. Linear regression tested time trends, controlling for name length. Results. Mean NME trigram surprisal rose in every decade between the 1980s and 2020s, from 7.21 to 8.50 nats (natural-logarithm units, higher meaning less predictable), an 18% increase (b = 0.038, p < .001, R2 = 0.34). Half of 2020s names (7% in the 1980s) contained a letter sequence found in no common English word (e.g., Jesduvroq, Omvoh). Nearest-neighbor similarity fell after the early 1990s. Trademark data showed the same trend (b = 0.016, p < .001). Generic names showed a weaker trend (b = 0.011, R2 = 0.063). Conclusions. Over four decades, drug names became more orthographically distinctive, consistent with namespace crowding, deliberate efforts to avoid confusing names, and branding strategy. Because unfamiliar letter sequences can introduce other error pathways, increased distinctiveness does not necessarily imply improved safety.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly consulted for health advice, but they can produce fluent statements that are false or unsupported, known as hallucinations, and this risk is poorly characterised in low-resource languages such as Bangla. We measured hallucinations of locally deployable open-weight LLMs in Bangla diabetes question answering and tested whether retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounded in Bangladeshs National Guideline on Diabetes Mellitus reduces them. Forty patient questions spanning six clinical sub-domains were each answered twice, under zero-shot prompting, by Qwen3.5-9B, TigerLLM-9B, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and Gemma-4-26B-A4B, and by BanglaDiaRAG, which adds hybrid dense (BGE-M3) and sparse (BM25) retrieval from a physician-reviewed Bangla guideline knowledge base to Qwen3.5-9B. Two physicians rated the 400 de-identified responses by consensus for medical accuracy, completeness, safety, readability and reliability on a 0-1 scale, and responses with accuracy below 0.70 were classified as hallucinated. Hallucination rates were 2.5% for Gemma-4-26B-A4B, 3.8% for TigerLLM-9B, 22.5% for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and 77.5% for Qwen3.5-9B. Guideline grounding lowered the rate of Qwen3.5-9B to 11.3% (difference -66.3 percentage points; 95% CI -76.3 to -55.0) and raised every criterion by 0.24 to 0.38 points (Holm-adjusted p < 0.001). BanglaDiaRAG outscored Qwen3.6-35B-A3B on all five criteria and matched or exceeded TigerLLM-9B, but it remained below Gemma-4-26B-A4B in safety, readability and reliability, and its residual errors were specific, confident and potentially harmful. Guideline grounding can turn a weak general-purpose model into a much safer Bangla diabetes assistant, but the choice of base model mattered as much as retrieval and no configuration was free of hallucination, so clinical oversight remains essential before patient-facing use.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a growing global health threat, and India's high antibiotic consumption makes public knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) a critical determinant of stewardship outcomes. Existing Indian KAP evidence is drawn from small, localised cohorts, leaving a gap in nationwide, digitally-sourced data. This study aimed to describe antibiotic-related knowledge, attitudes and self-reported practices among users of a digital healthcare platform in India, examine demographic and regional variation, and identify potential areas for future stewardship interventions. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among adult users of the Tata 1mg platform (December 2025-February 2026), with participants invited via an in-app banner. Knowledge and attitude were each scored on a 0-4 scale (4 items); practice was scored as a percentage of applicable items answered favourably, with scoring adjusted for branching logic based on antibiotic-access route. Of 10,726 respondents who started the survey, 4,883 completed it (45.5%). City of residence was mapped to one of six regions (India's five statutory Zonal Council zones plus a North-Eastern region) for 4,187 respondents. Associations with demographic characteristics were assessed using multivariable linear regression, and regional differences were assessed using one-way ANOVA. A parallel survey of 256 physicians was conducted to enable patient-provider comparison. Results: Mean scores were: knowledge 2.28 (SD 1.19), attitude 0.91 (SD 1.14), practice 44.9% (SD 33.4); attitude, not knowledge, was the weakest domain. Older age was associated with higher scores across all domains (practice: B=12.52, p<0.001 for age [&ge;]65 vs. 18-34); city tier was independently associated with lower knowledge and attitude (Tier 3 vs. Tier 1: p=0.010 and p<0.001, respectively). Regional differences were non-significant for knowledge and practice but significant for attitude (F=2.56, p=0.026, ^2=0.003), driven by lower scores in the North-Eastern region. In the parallel physician survey, 55.5% of respondents estimated that more than half of their patients self-medicated before consultation. Conclusion: In this platform-based sample, attitudes were the weakest domain, not knowledge, and 42.0% said their last antibiotic did not come on a doctor's recommendation. The findings may inform digital stewardship touchpoints, such as point-of-purchase guidance and prescription verification, in line with India's National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance 2.0. As a cross-sectional survey of platform users, it cannot establish the relative contributions of knowledge, beliefs and access pathways to antibiotic use.

Background HPV-vaccination prevents HPV-related cancers, but uptake remains suboptimal. In the Netherlands, a catch-up campaign invited 18-27-year-olds for an additional cost-free opportunity to initiate or complete their HPV-vaccination in 2023-2024, which led to 24% of this invited population getting vaccinated. As young adults increasingly seek health information online, understanding online questions, concerns and misinformation in response to the campaign may help improve future vaccination efforts. Supplemental to overall evaluation of the vaccination campaign, we piloted online social listening processes to generate an insight report for Public Health Service (PHS) Amsterdam. Objective This study piloted online social listening processes at the PHS Amsterdam to identify actionable insights into questions, concerns and misinformation surrounding the HPV-vaccination catch-up campaign among young adults. Methods Upon inventory of potential platforms and data sources, a retrospective online social listening analysis was conducted across the platforms Instagram, Facebook, and X, collecting data from PHS, the National Public Health Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), the Dutch public broadcasting foundation (NOS), and LINDA.meiden sources from January 1, 2023, to June 1, 2024. Publicly available posts, comments, and engagement concerning HPV-vaccination were manually collected, and inductively coded. Themes were assessed for risk, based on expected potential harm and observed reach, and used to develop recommendations. Results A total of 821 posts and 5157 comments were collected and analysed. Ten recurring themes were identified across varying levels of risk. Two themes were classified as high risk: an information gap regarding the effectiveness of HPV-vaccination and concerns about the transparency on HPV-vaccine side effects. Three themes were classified as medium risk: questioning HPV-vaccine effectiveness under certain circumstances, reduced general vaccine trust following COVID-19, and accessibility issues related to vaccination locations and service times. Two themes were classified as neutral risk: questions regarding eligibility criteria for the campaign and calls for broader HIPV-prevention measures. Finally, three low risk themes concerned questions regarding HPV-vaccine brand specifics, campaign choices, and questions about scheduling or rescheduling HPV-appointments. Comments also referred to subsequent information sources, including reliable sources (public health institutes), false narratives and misinformation. Recommendations focused on addressing questions and information gaps (i.e. improving HPV risk perception and providing more detailed HPV-vaccine information), improving communication about HPV-vaccination, and reducing practical barriers to vaccination. Conclusions Manual social listening across selected online sources provided actionable insights into the public discourse during the HPV-vaccination catch-up campaign. Results mostly reflected questions, concerns and information gaps. Although some themes were critical of HPV-vaccination, false narratives and misinformation did not dominate the discourse. Recommendations aim to reduce practical barriers and address information needs. This pilot showed that online social listening can be effectively implemented even with limited resources.

Background: Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are widely used for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) but have distinct toxicity profiles across generations. Aims: To investigate relationships between EGFR-TKI physicochemical, pharmacokinetic and pharmacological properties and drug-specific adverse drug reactions (ADRs) using national and global pharmacovigilance data. Methods: ADRs for erlotinib, afatinib and osimertinib were extracted from the UK MHRA Yellow Card scheme and WHO VigiAccess. Disproportionality analysis used reporting odds ratios (RORs). Signals were defined as ROR >2, lower 95% confidence interval >1 and >3 cases. Drug properties were curated from ChEMBL, emc, SmPC and EMA sources. Results: VigiAccess contained 88,662 individual case safety reports (163,619 ADRs) and Yellow Card contained 752 reports (1,814 ADRs). Four System Organ Class (SOC) signals were identified in VigiAccess and three in Yellow Card, with five additional Yellow Card Preferred Term signals. Eye disorders showed the strongest consistent association with erlotinib (VigiAccess ROR 4.33; Yellow Card ROR 4.18). Osimertinib was associated with pneumonitis (ROR 7.67) and pulmonary embolism (ROR 3.94). Afatinib showed psychiatric disorder signals in both databases (ROR 3.2-3.3) and diarrhoea (ROR 2.79). Neoplasm-related signals likely reflected confounding by indication. Conclusions: EGFR-TKIs demonstrate generation-specific pharmacovigilance profiles. Integration with drug properties supports mechanistic plausibility for several signals, while the atypical afatinib psychiatric association warrants further investigation. Findings are hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in controlled observational or mechanistic studies.

The explosive growth of ambient AI scribes in healthcare has focused almost exclusively on relieving clinician documentation burdens and enhancing clinician efficiency and reducing burnout. While most research has focused on the clinician experience, these same types of tools, such as a patient held AI Personal Health Assistant, can be put in the hands of patients to facilitate communication with healthcare providers, to provide greater autonomy and activation for patients in managing their own healthcare, and to facilitate the task of receiving and retaining complex new information. However, to ensure these tools serve as more than just administrative aids, we partnered with a large technology company to conceptually codesign how such a tool might be studied in real world settings in a way that reflected outcomes of greatest importance to patients and families. We used the Nominal Group Technique and engaged thirty three patients and caregivers and ten multidisciplinary clinicians in structured virtual sessions to identify the outcomes on which subsequent studies should hinge. Our findings reveal a significant misalignment between current industry trends and patient priorities. While the market emphasizes the scribe function for billing, stakeholders overwhelmingly prioritized the AIPHAs role in longitudinal care management and post visit coordination. The most critical outcome identified was the impact on communication and respect, suggesting that patients view AI as a mechanism to improve the human to human dynamic and ensure a shared understanding of the care plan. Our findings further highlighted that the primary hurdle for the use of patient held AI is not technical utility but clinician trust and the need for formal consent processes. Importantly, as this technology is new and integration into the clinical experience is still being explored, patients cannot assume they will have access to the transcript of their own encounter when that record is created and held by the health system. This gap highlights the potential value of a patient held tool, preserving discussions from their visit and follow up steps in clearer detail than they may receive in their clinical note or traditional visit summary. From a system perspective, this transition requires a strategic shift from measuring workflow focused efficiency to measuring patient side advocacy and engagement. By centering the evaluation of AI on these patient defined metrics and fundamentally designing subsequent AI investigations using a partnership model, health systems can move beyond simple automation toward a model of care delivery that empowers patients to navigate complex clinical journeys with greater autonomy and clarity.

Purpose: Accurately capturing a patient's health journey is essential for ensuring the validity of scientific and public health studies. Electronic health records (EHR) and administrative claims are commonly used in healthcare research, albeit separately. Previous research has demonstrated that EHR and claims capture different aspects of patient history and care, potentially introducing bias when used alone. In this study, we leveraged the largest public US EHR resource, the National Clinical Cohort Collaborative (N3C), alongside Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) claims data to compare their information coverage and agreement. Methods: We integrated N3C EHR and CMS data to create one cohesive dataset and quantified the proportion of key variables present in EHR alone, CMS alone, and the overlap present in both data sources. Overlap in information coverage was quantified pre- and post-landmark diagnosis of COVID-19. To evaluate the impact of data coverage differences, we conducted a case study evaluating the effect of COVID-19 vaccination on ischemic stroke using both data sources alone and in combination. Results: CMS data helped identify many individuals that were duplicated among EHR identifiers. Examination of the overlap showed that CMS data more completely captured conditions, while EHR data more completely captured medications after COVID-19 diagnosis. Some variables exhibited marked differences over time after landmark COVID-19 diagnosis. Using target trial emulation and self-controlled case series methods, we found that data capture variations altered effect estimates: EHR data alone yielded lower risk of ischemic stroke after vaccination in the target trial emulation (odds ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.28-0.79), with a smaller, non-significant reduction in the self-controlled case series (incidence rate ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.64-1.02), whereas analyses using CMS data alone or both sources combined yielded estimates close to the null in both designs. Conclusions: Results indicated that when using either a national database combining multiple EHR sources, or CMS claims data alone, patients' medical histories are less completely captured compared to when these data sources are combined. Case study results highlighted the value of combining data sources for not only yielding fuller patient health histories and valid scientific results, but for identifying and explaining biases that may emerge in research studies that rely on a single data source.

Background Interruptions are common in hospital outpatient departments (OPDs) and are linked to error. Many are clinically necessary, so the aim is to regulate them. Most interventions target the individual clinician. Little is known about how doctors manage interruptions in practice or what makes their strategies work. Methods Qualitative study using focus groups and interviews with 42 doctors working in UK National Health Service OPDs (19 sessions, September to November 2025). Participants were purposively sampled by clinical experience and self-reported patient complexity. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis, informed by Cognitive Load Theory and Social Identity Theory. Results We developed four themes. (1) Pre-emptive protection of attention. Doctors withdrew, signalled unavailability and set thresholds for interrupting. These depended on colleagues learning and sharing the norm, which staff rotation eroded. (2) Sharing the burden through team coordination. Designated roles and time-limited rotas moved interruptions to colleagues with capacity set aside for them and made interrupting legitimate. (3) Real-time cognitive repair. Doctors asked interrupters to wait while they secured the task, and rebuilt the consultation on return, sometimes with the patient's help. Asking a colleague to wait depended on seniority or team membership; some trainees described difficulty doing this with senior colleagues. (4) Organisational recognition as the precondition for sustainable regulation. Where supervision was built into job plans, the interruptions it generated were expected and doctors held capacity in reserve for them. Advice, vetting and telephone queries were rarely counted as work. Conclusions Each strategy served a cognitive purpose, and social and organisational conditions decided whether it was perceived to work. Interventions could make norms shared and roles explicit, count interruption work in job plans and keep routes open for junior staff to raise concerns. Evaluations should ask who is able to use them.