Pilot and Feasibility Studies

Background Trials in occupational populations, such as surgeons, face feasibility challenges due to high workload, restricted availability, and clinical heterogeneity, which may compromise recruitment, adherence, and retention. Objective To prespecify the feasibility framework and progression criteria for an internal pilot phase embedded within a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy with generalized exercise in surgeons with chronic spinal pain. Design Protocol for a prespecified internal pilot phase embedded within a pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group RCT. Methods The internal pilot will include the first four months of recruitment and aims to randomize at least 12 participants. Feasibility will be assessed across predefined domains, i.e., recruitment, eligibility, consent, intervention uptake, adherence, retention, data completeness, and treatment fidelity. Each domain is operationally defined and linked to prespecified progression criteria to ensure interpretability and decision-making utility. Criteria will be interpreted collectively to guide trial continuation. A minimal qualitative process evaluation will be embedded. Ethics and dissemination The host trial has received ethical approval (N-20240046) and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT07293130). The findings from the internal pilot will be reported in a separate feasibility manuscript.

Background: Lifestyle interventions incorporating medically-tailored meal delivery may support rapid behavior change among pregnant individuals with gestational diabetes (GDM). Purpose: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent lifestyle intervention for pregnant individuals with GDM. Primary outcomes included recruitment, retention, intervention receipt, and acceptability. Methods: We conducted a pilot randomized feasibility trial among pregnant individuals with GDM recruited from maternal fetal medicine clinics in the Hartford, Connecticut area. Participants were randomized to usual GDM care or the Meals4Moms intervention plus usual care. The intervention included medically-tailored meal delivery, personalized physical activity support, and multimodal education with digital tools. Participants completed a survey and three 24-hour dietary recalls at baseline and post-intervention. Meals4Moms participants also completed a semi-structured interview at follow-up. Intervention receipt was tracked by study staff. Results: Of 30 individuals approached, we screened 80% (n=24), of whom 75% (n=18/24) were eligible; we randomized 8 participants. Seventy-five percent (n=6/8) completed at least one component of the follow-up assessment (100%, n=4/4 Meals4Moms, 50%, n=2/4 Usual Care). One participant spent [≥]80% of her total food budget (n=1/4, 25%), and no participants completed [≥]80% of prescribed exercise sessions (range: 0-50%). All (n=4) Meals4Moms participants reported they would be very likely to participate in the program if they had GDM again, and 100% (n=4) would be very likely to recommend the program to a friend with GDM. Conclusions: While the Meals4Moms intervention was highly acceptable to participants, procedural refinements are needed prior to conducting a full-scale efficacy trial.

Background HIV remains a major public health challenge in South Africa, with gaps in early diagnosis and linkage to care driving onward transmission. Adolescent girls and young women face barriers to timely care, including stigma, privacy concerns, and limited clinic access, while healthcare providers work in resource-constrained settings with high client volumes. We evaluated the Self-Care from Anywhere (SCFA) toolkit, an AI-enabled intervention comprising an AI Companion for AGYW and a provider-facing Clinical Portal to support HIV prevention, testing, and linkage to care. The AI Companion is designed to complement and extend human-delivered services, particularly in resource constrained settings, rather than replace in-person counselling. Methods We conducted an exploratory study to assess the usability, feasibility, and acceptability of the SCFA toolkit in Gauteng Province (November 2024-May 2025). AGYW engaged with the AI Companion, and a subset completed a simulated HIV self-testing activity with AI-delivered counselling. Pre and post-intervention surveys, including the System Usability Scale (SUS), were administered. Usability testing of the Clinical Portal involved healthcare providers using the toolkit without formal training to capture first impressions. A subset of AGYW and healthcare providers participated in separate focus group discussions or in-depth interviews. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results A total of 97 AGYW were enrolled; 75.3% had completed high school and 91.8% were unemployed or full time students. Most participants (85.6%) self-reported HIV-negative status, and 63.9% reported sexual activity in the past 12 months. The AI Companion demonstrated high usability (mean SUS 87.7, SD 12.7) and was perceived as acceptable and useful, particularly for its personalisation and confidentiality features. Healthcare providers had a mean age of 34 years (SD 6.5), with about half serving as HIV testing and screening counsellors. Most providers rated the Clinical Portal ease of use, comprehension, and client support as positive to very positive, though 23% expressed concerns regarding workflow efficiency and their ability to manage additional client volume. Providers also highlighted the Clinical Portal value for case management. Conclusion AI-powered digital health tools, such as the SCFA toolkit, show potential to enhance user engagement and support care delivery, with high usability and acceptability demonstrated among AGYW and healthcare providers. Continued user-centred refinement is essential to ensure these tools remain responsive to the evolving needs and care contexts of diverse user groups.

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) can cause pain and severe walking limitation. Although surgery aims to improve walking, many patients do not achieve clinically meaningful gains. Rehabilitation can improve outcomes, yet existing programmes lack robust evidence and theoretical underpinning. This study aimed to (1) co-design a theory-informed rehabilitation programme to improve walking after LSS surgery, and (2) evaluate feasibility of conducting a future trial and acceptability of the intervention. Methods: A multi-methods study included intervention co-design followed by a single-arm feasibility study. Co-design used an adapted Experience-Based Co-Design approach with patients, carers, and healthcare professionals (n=39), integrating the Behaviour Change Wheel. This resulted in STructured Rehabilitation and InDividualised Exercise and Education (STRIDE), delivered over 12-week pre- and 12-weeks post-surgery, targeting knowledge, expectations, perceived control, physical capability, and fears. Adults aged [≥]50 years awaiting LSS surgery were recruited to a before-after feasibility study. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and retention. Acceptability was assessed using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire (0-5 (high acceptability)) and focus groups. Clinical outcomes measured at baseline, post-prehabilitation, and post-rehabilitation included 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) and mean daily step count over 7 days. Results: Fifteen of 31 eligible participants were recruited (48%; mean age 70 years), with 80% retained to study end (2 decided against surgery, 1 unable to complete final assessment). Acceptability was high (median 5/5, IQR 0). Participants valued the personalised, supportive approach and reported improved motivation and preparation for surgery, though travel was burdensome. Small pre-operative and moderate-to-large post-operative improvements were observed in 6MWD (+49.9 m and +81.6 m) and daily step count (+868 and +1405 steps/day). Conclusions: This co-designed, physiotherapy-led, behaviour-change rehabilitation programme was acceptable to participants, with encouraging recruitment, retention, and signals of improved walking following LSS surgery. The findings support progression to a future trial.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic significantly accelerated the adoption of telemedicine, but it also exposed gaps in effective remote clinical assessment, particularly for medically vulnerable patients in rural areas. The ORCHARD intervention aimed to address this by providing patients with a Medical Self-Assessment Box to enable self-reporting of vital signs during remote consultations. MethodsA single-centre randomised mixed-methods feasibility trial recruited medically vulnerable patients from a rural general practice in Northeast Scotland. Participants in intervention group received a home medical equipment box for use during telemedicine consultations over six months. Patients and GPs were interviewed and transcripts were analysed using Framework Analysis. ResultsTwelve (15%) of 82 eligible invited patients enrolled. Six each were allocated to intervention and control group. 50%(n=3)patients in intervention group used equipment in 45%(5 of 11)teleconsultations and rated it helpful in all 5 uses (100%). The intervention group had 18% fewer primary care contacts than controls. All remote consultations were by telephone. Framework Analysis of patient interviews identified facilitators such as ease of use, improved triage access, reassurance, and barriers related to GP non-engagement and written instructions. GP interviews identified clinical value in patient-generated readings, alongside concerns regarding workload and patient over-monitoring. ConclusionsHalf of intervention participants used the medical-equipment box during remote consultations, all finding it useful, though frequency of use varied among particpants.A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the Medical Self-Assessment Box for optimising remote consulting in medically vulnerable rural patients is feasible.Prior to a definitive trial refinements are recommended to patient labelling, GP engagement, and training materials.

Introduction: Our aim was to examine the implementation of an online community-based exercise (CBE) intervention with adults living with HIV. Methods: We conducted a 12-month community-engaged intervention study with adults living with HIV in partnership with the Toronto YMCA, Canada. We conducted a two phased intervention study involving Phase 1) Intervention: participants were asked to exercise three times/week, supervised every two weeks with online personal coaching, and attend monthly online educational sessions (6-months), and Phase 2) Follow-Up: participants were asked to continue exercising thrice weekly, independently (6-months). We assessed engagement in physical activity (PA) weekly, and body composition, strength, physical function, and flexibility outcomes every two months (bimonthly) across both phases (12-months). We used segmented regression to assess the change in outcomes within and between phases to assess adoption, effect and maintenance of the intervention. Results: Of the 32 participants who initiated, 22 (69%) completed the intervention; and 18 (56%) completed the follow-up. The majority identified as men (69%), median age was 53 years (25th, 75th percentiles: 43, 60), with a median of 3 (1,7) concurrent health conditions. Median number of coaching sessions attended was 10/13 (77%). Participant engagement in [≥]30min of moderate or vigorous physical activity in the past week increased from 3.24 days at baseline (95%CI:2.69, 3.79) to 3.36 days (95%CI:2.83,3.89) at the end of intervention to 3.35 days (95%CI:2.81,3.89) at end of follow-up [overall mean increase of 0.11 days (95%CI: 0.02,0.20)]. During the intervention, there were significant mean decreases for weight (-1.31kg), body mass index (BMI) (-0.40kg/m2), and waist circumference (-2.92cm); and mean increases for push-ups (+7.11 in a minute), plank time (+38.13 sec), sit-to-stand (+2.86 times in 30 sec), and sit-and-reach (+3.47 cm). There were no changes in muscle mass, body fat percent and fat free mass. During the follow-up phase, there were additional significant mean decreases in body weight (-1.52 kg), BMI (-0.50 kg/m2) and sit-to-stand (+1.52 times in 30 sec). Conclusions: Participants demonstrated increases in physical activity and improvements in strength, weight, body composition, physical function, and flexibility with the online CBE intervention, some of which were sustained at the end of the study. Future research should incorporate strategies to enhance engagement in physical activity among adults with HIV.

ObjectiveThis study evaluates the impact of systemic GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) use on surgical wound healing in high-risk surgical populations, including patients with diabetes, and implications for perioperative planning and healing outcomes. ApproachThis pilot retrospective cohort study compared adult surgery patients with non-healing postoperative wounds by their GLP-1RA use. Outcomes included healing status, time to wound closure, and number of surgical interventions. ResultsThe cohort included 35 non-GLP-1RA users and 16 GLP-1RA users with comparable baseline characteristics, except for significant higher prevalence of venous insufficiency among users. Though median time to closure was similar for all patients, users required fewer surgical interventions and their wounds reached closure in significant difference from non-users. Among patients with diabetes, all GLP-1RA users healed significantly compared to non-users. InnovationThe impact of GLP-1RA therapy on wound healing in high-risk reconstructive and soft-tissue surgery remains poorly defined. This pilot cohort addresses that gap, offering an early signal that GLP-1RA use is associated with improved wound healing and fewer postoperative interventions. These findings may inform perioperative practice by identifying a systemic pharmacologic factor that optimizes surgical outcomes in high-risk populations. ConclusionGLP-1RA use was associated with higher healing rates and fewer interventions, particularly among patients with diabetes. These findings support a beneficial role in surgical wound healing and warrant larger multi-site studies.

ObjectiveTo explore the interpretation of unexpected results from a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Study Design and SettingAdjunctive frequentist (power and type{square}M error) and Bayesian analyses were performed on a recently published RCT reporting a statistically significant relative risk reduction (p <0.01) for caffeinated coffee drinkers compared with abstinence on atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence. Individual patient data for the Bayesian survival models were reconstructed from the RCT published material and priors informed by the RCT power calculations. ResultsThe original RCT design had limited power for realistic effect sizes, increasing susceptibility to type{square}M (magnitude) error. Bayesian analyses also tempered the benefit for caffeinated coffee implied by standard statistical analysis resulting in only modest probabilities of clinically meaningful risk reductions (e.g., hazard ratio < 0.9 of 88% or a risk difference > 2% of 82%). ConclusionsSupplemental frequentist and Bayesian approaches can provide robustness checks for unexpected RCT findings, providing contextualization, clarifying distinctions between statistical and clinical significance, and guiding replication needs. HighlightsO_LIRandomized controlled trial (RCT) results may be unexpected and challenge prior beliefs C_LIO_LISupplemental frequentist and Bayesian analyses can clarify interpretation of surprising findings C_LIO_LIPower and type{square}M error assessments help evaluate design adequacy for realistic effects C_LIO_LIBayesian posterior probabilities provide additional nuanced insights into contextulaization and clinical significance C_LI

ObjectiveTo evaluate the real-world effectiveness of Intact Fish Skin Graft (IFSG) compared with standard of care (SOC) in the treatment of Stage 3-4 pressure ulcers, using clinically meaningful outcomes including wound healing rate and percent area reduction (PAR). Materials and MethodsA retrospective matched cohort study was conducted using deidentified electronic health record (EHR) data from the U.S. Wound Registry. Patients with Stage 3-4 pressure ulcers treated with IFSG (n=40) were compared to a matched SOC control group (n=40). 1:1 covariate matching was performed to reduce confounding across key patient and wound characteristics, including age, mobility status, comorbidities (e.g., diabetes, peripheral artery disease), and wound features (age, size, location, and depth). Outcomes included healed status, healed or improved rate, and percent area reduction (PAR). ResultsThe study population represented a high-risk, real-world cohort (n=40 per group), with only 37.5% ambulatory patients and a high prevalence of multiple concurrent wounds. IFSG treatment demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared to SOC: O_LIHealed or improved: 67.5% (IFSG) vs 55.0% (SOC) (p=0.0379) C_LIO_LIHealed: 45.5% (IFSG) vs 33.3% (SOC) C_LIO_LIPercent area reduction (PAR): 49% (IFSG) vs 34% (SOC) (p=0.0028) C_LI These findings indicate statistically significant improvements in percent area reduction and in the proportion of wounds that were healed or improved with IFSG. The proportion achieving complete healing was numerically higher with IFSG than with SOC, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. ConclusionIn this real-world matched cohort analysis, Intact Fish Skin Graft demonstrated superior effectiveness compared to standard of care in the management of Stage 3-4 pressure ulcers, with improvements in healing-related outcomes and percent area reduction. These results support the use of IFSG as an effective advanced therapy for hard-to-heal pressure ulcers.

Abstract Background Between 2021 and 2022, primary care obesity management was entering the early diffusion phase of newer anti obesity pharmacotherapy, as GLP1 based treatments began reshaping expectations. However, it was unclear whether primary care clinicians and practice environments were prepared to deliver comprehensive obesity care. (1,2) Methods In 2021 to 2022, we surveyed 276 clinicians from three cohorts: an opt-in national physician panel (Cohort A), clinicians from an integrated health system (Cohort B), and clinicians from a rural accountable care organization (Cohort C). The survey, informed by formative patient and physician focus groups conducted in 2021, assessed current and desired competence, attitudes, confidence, perceived forces for change, and barriers to obesity care. Analyses were descriptive (means and standard deviations). Results Across cohorts, desired competence exceeded current competence. The largest gaps involved recommending behavioral interventions, developing comprehensive care plans, and providing ongoing obesity management support. Attitudes toward obesity care were generally favorable, while confidence that current practices reflected best practice was only moderate. Professional and personal forces for change were moderate, patient driven motivators were moderate to high, whereas social (peer/organizational) reinforcement was weak. Reported barriers extended beyond knowledge deficits to include patient engagement, competing demands, cost, and practical constraints. Conclusions At the threshold of the GLP1 era, primary care clinicians were motivated to improve obesity care but lacked consistent support to deliver comprehensive management. The relative absence of peer and organizational reinforcement suggests that readiness for change reflected not only individual knowledge and attitudes, but also the degree of peer and organizational reinforcement that supports comprehensive obesity care in routine practice.

Patient-reported outcomes have become standard in facial skin cancer surgery, yet clinicians currently lack validated tools to predict postoperative appearance satisfaction from preoperative patient characteristics. We developed and internally validated a prediction model for appearance satisfaction three months after facial skin cancer reconstruction. A prospective cohort study enrolled 287 patients at a tertiary referral center (2017-2018); 111 patients with complete data were included in the primary analysis. Patients completed the FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module preoperatively and at three months postoperatively. Our multivariable linear regression model incorporated age, sex, comorbidities, smoking status, and baseline appearance satisfaction. The model explained 23.0% of variance in postoperative appearance satisfaction (R2 = 0.23; adjusted R2 = 0.19; p < 0.001). Baseline appearance satisfaction (B = 0.48; 95% CI 0.28-0.68; p < 0.001) and female sex (B = -7.16; 95% CI -12.52 to -1.81; p = 0.009) emerged as independent predictors. Bootstrap resampling (500 iterations) yielded an optimism-corrected R2 of 0.17, supporting acceptable internal validity. Mean appearance satisfaction remained stable from baseline (54.8 +/- 13.8) to three months (57.0 +/- 16.4; p = 0.27). Baseline appearance satisfaction and female sex independently predict postoperative appearance satisfaction following facial skin cancer reconstruction. External validation in independent cohorts is warranted before clinical implementation.

Objectives: Introducing a new covariate adjustment method for hierarchical outcomes using ordinal logistic regression, comparing it with existing approaches, and assessing whether adjustment improves power in randomized trials with hierarchical outcomes. Methods: We developed an ordinal regression-based method for covariate adjustment of the win ratio and compared it with three alternatives: probability index models, inverse probability weighting, and a randomization-based estimator. Methods were applied to the EMPEROR-Preserved rial and tested through extensive simulations involving two common hierarchical outcome structures: time-to-event composites, and composites combining time-to-event with quantitative measures. Simulations assessed impacts on estimates, standard errors, and power across prognostic and non-prognostic settings. Results: In RCT data and simulations, covariate adjustment consistently increased power when adjusting for prognostic baseline variables. Gains were comparable to or greater than those in conventional Cox models, with no power loss for non-prognostic covariates. Our ordinal approach performed similarly to existing methods while providing interpretable covariate effect estimates. Adjusting for baseline values of quantitative components yielded power gains according to the baseline-to-follow-up correlation. Conclusions: Covariate adjustment for prognostic variables meaningfully improves efficiency in win ratio analyses for hierarchical outcomes. Our ordinal method is easily implemented and facilitates covariate effect interpretation. We recommend the broader adoption of covariate adjustment and our ordinal method in randomized trials using hierarchical outcomes.

BackgroundLasers have wide applications in medicine and dermatology, but are associated with pain and anxiety, particularly in younger patients. Pain mitigation is often limited to topical anesthetics in the outpatient setting. Distraction techniques are limited by the need for ocular protection, which can include adhesive eye patches that can completely occlude vision. Virtual reality is effective at managing procedural pain and anxiety under other short medical procedures and is a promising tool for this population. ObjectiveThis trial aims to assess the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of Virtual Reality Pain Alleviation Therapeutic (VR-PAT) for pain management during outpatient laser procedures. Methods40 patients requiring outpatient laser therapy for at least two sessions will be recruited from a pediatric hospital in the midwestern United States for this crossover randomized, two-arm clinical trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio. During the first laser visit, the participant will be randomly assigned to either play the VR-PAT game during their procedure or wear the headset with a dark screen. Participants will answer questions about their pain (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10), anxiety (State Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children, NRS 0-10, Modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (mYPAS)), and pain medication usage. Those playing the VR-PAT will additionally report simulator sickness symptoms and their experience playing the game. At their second laser visit, participants will crossover to the opposite intervention from their first visit. The primary outcomes are the difference in self-reported pain and anxiety between the two interventions. Feasibility outcomes include the proportion of screened patients who are eligible, consent, and complete both visits and adverse events reported. To evaluate the efficacy of pain reduction, composite scores of pain score, pain medication will be calculated for each laser visit. To evaluate the efficacy of anxiety reduction, the change of mYPAS scores will be compared between control and VR groups at each visit using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. All statistical analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle in regard to intervention assignment at each visit. ResultsThe study was funded in January 2023 and began enrollment at that time. A total of n=44 participants were recruited and data collection was completed in November 2025, with n=40 subjects completing both visits. The sample was balanced with n=40 subjects using the intervention and participating in the control condition. The age range of the complete sample was 6 to 21 years at recruitment and was 55% female sex. Data analysis is in progress with final results planned for June 2026. ConclusionsFindings from this innovative randomized clinical trial will provide early evidence on the efficacy of the VR-PAT for reducing self-reported pain and anxiety during outpatient laser procedures. The results from this trial will inform a large-scale, multisite study. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05645224 [https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05645224]

Introduction Understanding provider preferences for the design of HIV treatment packages could enhance the implementation of programs to support the adoption of long-acting injectable antiretroviral therapy (LAI ART) by people living with HIV who are interested in initiating this treatment modality. Methods We recruited providers from New York City (NYC), Rockland, Putman, and Westchester County Ryan White Part A Medical Case Management (MCM) programs to complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE) containing twelve tasks with two alternatives and an opt-out option, with additional survey questions about implementation readiness and choice motivations. The alternatives included four attributes--Type of ART Medication (monthly or bimonthly LAI ART), Service Location and Mode, Support for Clients, and Rewards for Clients--with 2-4 levels each. We ran latent class multinomial logit analyses (LCA) with 1-5 classes to estimate preferences and explore hypothesis-free preference heterogeneity. We estimated attribute influence using relative importances and preferences using zero-centered part-worth utilities for each level. Results One hundred seventy-seven providers completed the survey (July 2022-January 2023). About half (52%) were 40-59 years old, 72% identified as women, and the plurality (41%) identified as Latino/a. We chose the two-group LCA solution. Bimonthly LAI ART was preferred over monthly LAI ART overall and in both groups. Group 1 (n=45) preferred more traditional adherence supports (e.g., injections at the clinic by appointment, injection appointment reminders) whereas Group 2 (n=132) preferred more client-centered supports (e.g., injections at home by appointment, free transportation to injection appointments if at a clinic). Both groups preferred higher monetary value gift cards for clients for every on-time injection. The top-ranking motivations indicated that participants prioritized patient convenience over job satisfaction and administrative or financial feasibility for the agency. The scores for all implementation measures indicate readiness to implement LAI ART in both groups. Conclusions Our implementation science-focused study suggests that providers of MCM services in NYC and surrounding counties are motivated to offer services to support clients' access and adherence to LAI ART. More work is needed to understand how programs have, in fact, integrated supports for LAI ART into their services.

Objectives: Acute gastroenteritis is a leading cause of pediatric emergency department (ED) visits. While ondansetron reduces vomiting, intravenous rehydration, and hospital admissions, its efficacy when initiated at triage remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate whether triage nurse-initiated administration of ondansetron in children with suspected gastroenteritis reduces the proportion of patients requiring observation following initial physician assessment. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in a tertiary pediatric ED in Canada. Children aged 6 months to 17 years presenting with morae than 3 episodes of vomiting in the preceding 24 hours (including 1 within 2 hours of arrival), were eligible. At triage, we randomized participants to receive liquid ondansetron or a color- and taste-matched placebo. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients requiring observation after the first physician evaluation. Secondary outcomes included post-intervention vomiting, ED length of stay, patient comfort, and 48-hour return visits. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03052361). Results: Recruitment was stopped prematurely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ninety-one participants were randomized to ondansetron (n= 44) or placebo (n= 47). Overall, 40 patients (45%) were discharged immediately after the initial physician assessment, with no difference between the ondansetron and placebo groups (44% vs. 45%; absolute difference -1%, 95% CI: -20% to 19%). No significant differences were observed in all secondary outcomes. Conclusion: In this trial, triage nurse-initiated ondansetron administration did not reduce the need for ED observation in children with presumed gastroenteritis. While being underpowered, this study could inform researchers planning larger clinical trials.

Purpose. To evaluate two smartphone-based methods for measuring the surface area of chronic wounds using : Woundtrack (semi-automated measurement: WT) and Woundsize (automated measurement: WS), and comparing them with the reference technique: digitized planimetry (PL). Population and methods. Pixaire 1 is an open-label, single-center study involving 42 patients, from May to June 2023. Wound surfaces were measured using the three methods by two independent experts. We realized a four steps statistical analysis: multivariate analysis of variance; correlation between the two experts (precision); agreement between the two evaluated methods and the reference (accuracy); analysis of non-conformities (differences of more than 20% in absolute values compared with the PL measurement) in a subset of wound less than 8 cm2. Results. Of the 42 patients, 6 were excluded from the statistical analysis (multiplanar wound: 4; difficult edge delineation: 2). We found no difference in multivariate analysis We showed excellent agreement (ICC > 0, 9) of repeated measures (precision) for all three protocols. We also demonstrated excellent agreement (ICC > 0, 9) between WT and WS measurements versus PL (accuracy). However, accuracy and precision were better for WT than for WS. Analysis of non-conformities in small areas wounds showed no difference in variance and distribution between WT and PL, and showed a significant difference between WS and PL. Conclusion. Woundtrack is close to Digitized Planimetry, in terms of precision (reproductibility of the measure) and accuracy (correlation of measures with digitized planimetry). Despite the existence of non-conformities in small wounds, WT does not significantly differ of PL in this subset. WT should be considered as an effective method to measure the area of the wound, similar to PL, with a real benefit in implementation in current care setting (easy to realize, less time consuming). Woundsize showed less consistent results, despite a reliability and an accuracy that remains good. Its integration in a "Algorithm: propose then Clinician: correct and validate" procedure seems most efficient way to implement such methods.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to improve the efficiency of evidence synthesis and reduce human error. However, robust methods for evaluating rapidly evolving AI tools within the practical workflows of evidence synthesis remain underdeveloped. This protocol describes a study design for assessing the effectiveness, efficiency, and usability of AI tools in comparison to traditional human-only workflows in the context of Cochrane systematic reviews. Methods: Members of the Cochrane Evaluation of (Semi-) Automated Review (CESAR) Methods Project developed an adaptive platform study-within-a-review (SWAR) design, modeled after clinical platform trials. This design employs a master protocol to concurrently evaluate multiple AI tools (interventions) against a standard human-only process (control) across three key review tasks: title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction. The adaptive framework allows for the addition or removal of AI tools based on interim performance analyses without necessitating a restart of the study. Performance will be assessed using metrics such as accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, precision), efficiency (time on task), response stability, impact of errors, and usability, in alignment with Responsible use of AI in evidence SynthEsis (RAISE) principles. Results: The study will generate comparative data about the performance and usability of specific AI tools employed in a semi- or fully automated manner relative to standard human effort. The protocol provides a flexible framework for the assessment of AI tools in evidence synthesis, addressing the limitations of static, one-time evaluations. Discussion: This study protocol presents a novel methodological approach to addressing the challenges of evaluating AI tools for evidence syntheses. By validating entire workflows rather than individual technologies, the findings will establish an evidence base for determining the viability of integrating AI into evidence-synthesis workflows. The adaptive design of this study is flexible and can be adopted by other investigators, ensuring that the evaluation framework remains relevant as new tools emerge.

ImportanceGuideline-concordant care for young children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) includes recommending parent training in behavior management (PTBM) as first-line treatment. However, assessing guideline adherence through manual chart review is time-consuming and costly, limiting scalable and timely quality-of-care measurement. ObjectiveTo evaluate the accuracy and explainability of large language models (LLMs) in identifying PTBM recommendations in pediatric electronic health record (EHR) notes as a scalable alternative to manual chart review. Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in a community-based pediatric healthcare network in California consisting of 27 primary care clinics. The study cohort included children aged 4-6 years with [&ge;] 2 primary care visits between 2020-2024 and ICD-10 diagnoses of ADHD or ADHD symptoms (n=542 patients). Clinical notes from the first ADHD-related visit were included. A stratified subset of 122 notes, including all cases with model disagreement, was manually annotated to assess model performance in identifying PTBM recommendations and rank model explanations. ExposuresAssessment and plan sections of clinical notes were analyzed using three generative large language models (Claude-3.5, GPT-4o, and LLaMA-3.3-70B) to identify the presence of PTBM recommendations and generate explanatory rationales and documentation evidence. Main Outcomes and MeasuresModel performance in identifying PTBM recommendations (measured by sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and F1-score) and qualitative explainability ratings of model-generated rationales (based on the QUEST framework). ResultsAll three models demonstrated high performance compared to expert chart review. Claude-3.5 showed balanced performance (sensitivity=0.89, PPV=0.95, and F1-score=0.92) and ranked highest in explainability. LLaMA3.3-70B achieved sensitivity=0.91, PPV=0.89, and F1-score=0.90, ranking second for explainability. GPT-4o had the highest PPV [0.97] but lowest sensitivity [0.82], with an F1-score of 0.89 and the lowest explainability ranking. Based on classifications from the best-performing model, Claude-3.5, 26.4% (143/542) of patients had documented PTBM recommendations at their first ADHD-related visit. Conclusions and RelevanceLLMs can accurately extract guideline-concordant clinician recommendations for non-pharmacological ADHD treatment from unstructured clinical notes while providing clear explanations and supporting evidence. Evaluating model explainability as part of LLM implementation for medical chart review tasks can promote transparent and scalable solutions for quality-of-care measurement.

Background: Older in-patients have a higher prevalence of diabetes and cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment can make blood glucose management more challenging, since patients might not remember to measure blood glucose or report symptoms. Investigating the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) compared to usual care will inform clinical interpretations in this vulnerable population. Aim: To compare CGM derived glucose metrics and point-of-care tests (POCT) in older in-patients with T2DM and cognitive impairment and to investigate CGM accuracy compared to POCT in the hospital settings with the same population. Methods: Thirty-two older people with comorbid T2DM and cognitive impairment were recruited within a tertiary care hospital in the UK. All participants were naive to CGM and were asked to wear blinded Dexcom G7 sensors for up to 10 days. All participants received usual care in their hospital stay including the use of POCT. Key accuracy metrics comprised the mean absolute relative difference (MARD), median absolute relative difference (median ARD), and Clarke Error Grid (CEG), correlation (R2) analysis. In addition, the percentage of CGM readings falling within +/-20% of reference glucose values when the reference was >5.6 mmol/L, or within +/-1.1 mmol/L when the reference was <=5.6 mmol/L (+/-20%/1.1 mmol/L) was calculated to assess analytical and clinical accuracy. Results: Thirty participants completed the study. CGM derived mean glucose for time in range (TIR= 4-10 mmol/mol) was 36.23% (min= 0%, max= 90%), time above range (TAR >= 10 mmol/mol) was 62.87% and time below range (TBR <= 3.9 mmol/mol) was 1.03%. Mean TIR based on available POCT readings was 40.84%, TAR was 57.24% and TBR 1.81%, showing similar readings as CGM derived glucose metrics. Comparison of the two resulted in a MARD of 17.4%, and median ARD of 12.2% and the outcome of +/-20%/1.1 mmol/L analysis was 72.3%. CEG analysis revealed that 99.3% of the data points fell within the clinically acceptable zones (Zone A and Zone B), and there was a strong correlation (R2=0.82) between CGM and POCT. CGM captured more hypoglycaemic readings in our participants. Conclusion: Our study suggests that CGM and POCT derived glucose metrics are largely similar for in-patients with diabetes and cognitive impairment. CGM remains as a safe and clinically acceptable tool, and able to capture more nocturnal hypoglycaemia compared to POCT in a subgroup of patients. These initial findings show that CGM might be a viable alternative for people with comorbid T2DM and cognitive impairment.

Social prescribing has assumed increasing dominance in policy and practice internationally, including in the UK, where it has an increasing role in addressing social needs such as isolation, and social determinants of ill health. Although General Practitioners are perceived as key referral sources, social workers in one locality were found to play a significant role in referral. This suggests that the social work role in this context has been under recognised and under explored. This study sought to explore social workers' perceptions and experiences of social prescribing through an online survey conducted from January to June 2022. All UK social workers were eligible to participate, regardless of whether they had made referrals. A total of 105 responses were collected from all UK nations. Data was analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Four key themes were generated: contended and contested boundaries; complementary spaces; delineated spaces of simplicity and complexity; social work under threat. Participants recognised that social prescribing could provide valuable client support and could be a useful resource for social workers. However, they also expressed concerns about overlapping professional boundaries and the potential for social prescribing to encroach on social work, perceiving it as most appropriate for the delivery of support to those with 'low level' needs.