Systematic Reviews

Importance Non-inferiority trials are becoming increasingly popular in abdominal surgery. The non- inferiority margin is critical in the interpretation and conclusion of these trials. Objective This systematic review aims to assess the methodological and reporting quality of non- inferiority randomized controlled trials in abdominal surgery. Evidence Review Non-inferiority trials were systematically identified by searching Ovid Medline, Embase and the CENTRAL databases from 2006 until December 2025. Randomized controlled trials in adult patients with any type of abdominal surgical intervention in at least one trial arm and a sample size greater than or equal to 100 were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the definition of the non- inferiority margin. Secondary outcomes were the reporting of the non-inferiority margin, the robustness of its estimation, the uncertainty of the point estimate and the adequacy of conclusions. Findings A total of 11 045 trials were identified, of which 101 were eligible, enrolling 44 370 patients. Most trials provided a rationale for the non-inferiority design, while six (5.9%) trials did not. Previous literature was commonly used (n=56; 55.4%), but the non-inferiority margin was most often based on a clinical fixed margin or on historical comparison of the treatment and the active comparator. Based on the margin, investigators tolerated substantially worse outcomes of the treatment compared to the comparator. Conclusions were appropriate based on the confidence interval and the predefined non- inferiority margin in 88 (87.1%) of trials. The clinical judgement of the conclusion was overall adequate. Confidence interval estimations were reported in 16 (15.8%) of trials. Simulation studies were limited by the reporting quality. Conclusions and Relevance Clinical fixed margins are commonly used in abdominal surgery non-inferiority randomized controlled trials, however, substantial shortcomings in reporting limit the interpretability and reproduction of study findings. Based on the findings of this study, guidance on surgical- specific non-inferiority margin definitions is needed.

Importance. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses inform suicide-prevention policy and practice, but broad database searches are difficult to screen manually. This limits capture of upstream interventions, such as economic policies, with indirect effects on suicide. Reliable automated screening could make broader and more comprehensive evidence syntheses feasible. Objective. To develop and validate ScreenAgent, a large language model (LLM) agent for title and abstract screening, and a review-specific method for prospectively estimating screening performance. Design, Setting, and Participants. ScreenAgent was validated internally on a prospective meta-analysis, and externally on two published systematic reviews. The correct include and exclude decisions followed standard systematic-review screening methodology. Exposures. ScreenAgent, an LLM agent returning structured include-or-exclude decisions. Records it marked for inclusion were re-checked by a second, cascade pass using a higher-effort LLM. For the external reviews, the agent's prompt was tuned automatically on a small set of labeled examples. Main Outcomes and Measures. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, workload reduction (the percentage of records removed from human review), and agent-versus-human reliability via Cohen kappa. Sensitivity was estimated by direct comparison (internal) and 5-fold cross-validation (external). Results. In the internal validation, ScreenAgent identified 43 of 44 eligible studies (sensitivity 97.7%; 95% CI, 88.2%-99.6%) with a generic prompt applied without any review-specific optimization, specificity 98.0%, and a measured full-corpus workload reduction of 99.4%. The cost was $855.91 for the full 201,064-record corpus (0.43 US cents per record). Agent-versus-human-consensus agreement exceeded human-versus-human agreement (Cohen kappa 0.75 vs 0.64; percent agreement 97.3% vs 95.4%). For two external validation studies, automatic tuning resulted in a cross-validated sensitivity of 95.9% (95% CI, 90.0%-98.4%) and 97.4% (90.9%-99.3%), with workload reductions of 97.4% and 98.4%. Conclusions and Relevance. Suicide prevention efforts often require rapid consolidation of evidence because of the inherent challenges of single studies trying to prevent rare outcomes. On both internal and external validation sets, ScreenAgent identified nearly all eligible studies with human-level reliability for a fraction of a US cent per record while keeping human reviewers as the final arbiters. By making broad searches feasible and screening performance measurable beforehand, this approach can serve as a transparent methodology to strengthen the speed at which we can inform and advance suicide prevention efforts.

Importance: Social prescribing is implemented to address unmet social needs and improve health, but expansion has outpaced evidence from randomized trials. Objective: To quantify the effects of social prescribing on mental, physical, and social health outcomes in adults. Data Sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, AMED, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, NHS EED, CEA registry, clinicaltrials.gov, OpenGrey, and WHO ICTRP (English language). Trials published from 1992 through 2022 were identified from 23 reviews, supplemented by searches from January 2023 through September 2025. Study Selection: Randomized trials comparing usual care or waitlist with interventions facilitating connection to community-based resources delivered by non-health care professionals. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Pairs of reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled mean differences or standardized mean differences as Hedges g with 95% CIs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mental health, blood pressure, metabolic and anthropometric outcomes, physical activity, loneliness and social isolation, quality of life, health care use, and adverse events. Results: Thirty-three randomized trials involving 13 714 participants were included. High risk of bias was identified in 40% of trials. Social prescribing was associated with reduced depressive symptoms (7 trials; 1087 participants; standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.23; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.08), lower systolic blood pressure (11 trials; 2817 participants; mean difference, -2.69 mm Hg; 95% CI, -5.36 to -0.02), increased physical activity (7 trials; 3409 participants; SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.25), and improved quality of life (10 trials; 3134 participants; SMD, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.01-0.29). No clear benefit was found for anxiety, loneliness and social isolation, glycemic control, blood lipids, anthropometric outcomes, or health care use. One trial reported a process evaluation, 7 included economic evaluations, and adverse events were infrequently reported. Conclusions and Relevance: Social prescribing was associated with modest improvements in depressive symptoms, systolic blood pressure, physical activity, and quality of life. Evidence was lacking for other claimed benefits, and process and economic evaluations were uncommon, identifying priorities for future trials.

Introduction Systematic review authors commonly encounter situations where the data required for meta-analysis are incompletely reported (e.g. when effect estimates are reported without a measure of precision). In this circumstance, many systematic review authors use a method other than meta-analysis (e.g. vote counting), but rarely describe those methods or the rationale for selecting them. We aimed to investigate what methods authors consider when meta-analysis of all study results is not possible, and what factors influence their decisions. Methods We interviewed 12 experienced systematic review authors, editors and methodologists, presenting four scenarios in which it was not possible to combine all results using meta-analysis. Scenarios varied in the number and size of included studies, available data, and risk of bias. Participants discussed the methods they considered to summarise, synthesise and present the results; whether they would synthesise available results; and how they would draw overall conclusions. Results Factors that informed decisions included participants' overall purpose in conducting synthesis, existing beliefs about study results and synthesis methods, trust in the available data, and the decision-making needs of end users. Participants differed in which synthesis methods to use, whether they would use multiple synthesis methods, and which studies they would analyse with each method. Conclusions We identified several synthesis methods considered when meta-analysis of all results is not possible, and factors that influence the selection of methods, neither of which are routinely reported. More complete reporting of these methods and the factors informing decisions would allow readers to better understand the decisions made.

Effective postoperative pain control is essential following laparoscopic cholecystectomy, yet the analgesic value of a standardised 150 mg preoperative dose of pregabalin has not been clearly established. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesised evidence from seven randomised controlled trials published between 2008 and 2025 to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin when administered before surgery. Four trials reported 24-hour postoperative pain scores, and pooled analysis demonstrated that pregabalin significantly reduced pain compared with control (SMD = 0.80 lower; 95% CI, 1.42 to 0.18 lower; p = 0.01), although statistical heterogeneity was high (I-squared = 81%). Pregabalin also produced notable reductions in opioid consumption, including fentanyl (SMD = 1.24 lower; p = 0.002) and tramadol (SMD = 4.21 lower; p = 0.002), again with considerable variability across studies. Sedation was slightly increased but did not reach statistical significance, and there were no significant differences in postoperative nausea, vomiting, or headache. Sensitivity analyses supported the stability of these findings. Overall, the results indicate that a single 150 mg preoperative dose of pregabalin meaningfully reduces postoperative pain and opioid requirements following laparoscopic cholecystectomy while maintaining an acceptable safety profile, supporting its use as part of a multimodal analgesic strategy.

One-to-one peer support is widely used in mental health services, but the components associated with better outcomes remain unclear. We systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials and conducted additive component network meta-analyses to identify which components of one-to-one peer support worker interventions were associated with outcomes for adults using mental health services. CINAHL Ultimate, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN were searched, supplemented by citation tracking, previous reviews and expert consultation. Interventions were coded for seven components: Training and development, Maintaining peer support worker wellbeing, Relationship-building, Social support, Emotional support, Practical support and Cultural adaptation. The review followed PRISMA-NMA reporting guidance and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022355291). Thirty-six trials randomised 6,645 participants across nine countries. Only quality of life and recovery yielded estimable component effects at one or more follow-up points. For quality of life, Practical support had a positive incremental estimate at 3 months (standardised mean difference 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.87); no component showed clear evidence of benefit at 6 months; and at 12 months Social support had a positive estimate (1.57, 0.12 to 3.01), whereas Maintaining peer support worker wellbeing had a negative estimate (-1.66, -3.05 to -0.28). These estimates were not consistent across follow-up points. For recovery, Relationship-building had positive estimates at 6 months (0.90, 0.03 to 1.78) and 12 months (0.50, 0.29 to 0.72). Networks were sparse and often disconnected, and additivity could not be tested in disconnected networks. Current trials do not permit definitive prioritisation of peer-support components. Relationship-building was the most consistent candidate component, but all findings remain provisional. Future trials should prospectively specify, manipulate and measure component delivery.

Background Virtual hospital (VH) pathways support early discharge through remote monitoring, but limited evidence has hindered implementation in colorectal surgery. This study aimed to define patient- and carer-relevant outcomes and experiences of VH following colorectal surgery. Methodology A patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) consultation was conducted with 8 participants (7 patients, 1 carer; 4 women, 4 men) who had experienced VH following bowel resection at a high-volume robotic unit. Purposive sampling ensured that 50% of participants had experienced readmission. The 90-minute session was delivered via Microsoft Teams. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results Seven themes were identified: readmission, remote monitoring, carer burden, recovery, equity, readiness for discharge, and information delivery. Patients supported early discharge when remote monitoring enabled timely detection of complications and readmission pathways were efficient. Readmission was not perceived as failure but as appropriate escalation. Dissatisfaction with readmission was related to delays in emergency care. Remote monitoring provided psychological safety, with patients feeling held at home. Carers assumed substantial, often unrecognised, quasi-clinical roles. Recovery was defined by return to function rather than length of stay. Equity concerns were evident, with VH favouring those with adequate support at home, digital literacy, and language proficiency. Discharge readiness was both clinical and psychological. Information delivery at discharge was often poorly retained and requires reinforcement preoperatively at every encounter with patients and carers. Conclusions VH pathways are acceptable and valued. Readmission is a marker of system responsiveness rather than failure of early discharge on VH. Psychological preparedness, carer support, and equitable access are critical to successful and scalable implementation of early discharge using a virtual hospital.

ABSTRACT Objective To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), its abbreviated versions and control conditions. Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Methods Screening, data extraction, coding, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently and in duplicate. Frequentist, random-effects network meta-analyses estimated odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcome was insomnia remission post-treatment. Secondary outcomes included dropout and subjective sleep continuity measures. Quality of the evidence for each arm was graded using the confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA). Data sources We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to December 15, 2025, with a medical information specialist. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CBT-I and its abbreviated versions with each other or with control conditions, in adults with insomnia, with or without comorbidities. To reduce clinical heterogeneity related to treatment intensity and adherence, we restricted inclusion to in-person delivery. Results We identified 11,379 records and included 77 RCTs (5,731 participants; mean age 52.2 years; 3,473 female). CBT-I (number of arms k = 53; number of participants n = 2,002), sleep restriction and stimulus control therapy (SRT+SCT; k = 16; n = 549), sleep restriction therapy (SRT; k = 5; n = 196) and stimulus control therapy (SCT; k = 7; n = 144) were associated with higher remission than sleep hygiene, relaxation therapy and other control conditions. These interventions were also effective in improving subjective sleep continuity measures. Cognitive therapy for insomnia (CT-I) was more beneficial than relaxation therapy. Dropout did not differ meaningfully between interventions and controls. Confidence in evidence was moderate for CBT-I, low for SRT&SCT and SRT, very low for SCT. Given the weighted mean proportion of insomnia remission among sleep hygiene arms of 20%, CBT-I probably leads to a remission rate of 41% (95% CI, 34%; 48%), SRT&SCT may lead to a remission rate of 40% (30%; 52%), SCT 43% (25%; 63%), and SRT 41% (26%; 57%). Conclusions CBT-I doubles the absolute insomnia remission compared with sleep hygiene, and its abbreviated behavioural therapies, namely, SRT+SCT, SCT and SRT may offer similar benefits with lower resource requirements, but evidence is less certain. CT-I needs further investigations. Relaxation therapy was inferior to these therapies. Implementation decisions should consider resource requirements and evidence certainty. Systematic review registration The Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/z48r2/.

BACKGROUND Safe and effective antidepressant deprescribing strategies are needed in general practice where most antidepressant prescribing occurs. METHODS We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial in general practice to test invitation to general practitioner (GP) review combined with resources to inform shared decision-making and guide hyperbolic tapering for stopping antidepressants compared to usual care. Adults taking antidepressants for longer than 12 months were recruited from 26 Australian GP practices between March 2023 and November 2024, irrespective of their intention to stop or depression or anxiety symptom scores. The primary outcome was cessation at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included cessation at 6 months, and >75% dose reduction and depression, anxiety and withdrawal symptom scores at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS Overall, 483 patients were randomised. Mean age was 50 years; 73% were women; mean duration of antidepressant use was 14.1 years. Cessation at 12 months was observed in 32 of 215 (14.9%) intervention and 16 of 187 (8.6%) usual care patients (odds ratio (OR) = 1.95 [95%CI, 1.00 to 3.81]; p=0.050). Cessation at 6 months was observed in 11.7% intervention vs 4.8% usual care (OR = 2.68; 95%CI, 1.18 to 6.05), and >75% dose reduction at 12 months in 19.6% intervention vs 9.9% usual care (OR = 2.28; 95%CI, 1.20 to 4.31). Symptom scores were similar between groups. No adverse events were attributable to the intervention. CONCLUSIONS In general practice, invitation to GP antidepressant review combined with information and guidance on hyperbolic tapering can support cessation or dose reduction without causing adverse effects or relapse. Absolute cessation rates were modest but still meaningful given the high prevalence of long term antidepressant use. TRIAL REGISTRATION ANZCT registry identifier, ACTRN12622001379707p.

Background: Dietary supplements (DS) are extensively used in Pakistan, frequently in conjunction with prescription medicines. Pharmacists are well positioned for patient counsesling due to their accessibility. However, their ability to provide evidence-based counseling remains uncertain due to their varying knowledge and training, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including Pakistan. The study assessed pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding DS counseling and identified gaps requiring intervention. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 256 registered pharmacists in Lahore, Pakistan. Data were collected using a validated, self-administered questionnaire assessing knowledge, attitudes, and counseling practices concerning dietary supplements over a period of six months i.e., July to December 2025. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Mean age was 31.0 {+/-} 6.2 years, with male predominance (56.3%), Doctor of Pharmacy degree (75.0%), community pharmacy practice (62.5%), and 1-5 years of experience (48.4%). Mean knowledge score was 6.18 {+/-} 1.71, with most (76.6%) exhibiting moderate knowledge. Mean attitude score was 7.01 {+/-} 1.94, with 91.4% demonstrating positive attitudes. Mean practice score was 7.91 {+/-} 2.93, with 68% exhibiting good counseling practices. Knowledge scores were significantly higher among female pharmacists (6.96 {+/-} 1.52 vs. 5.57 {+/-} 1.61, p=0.001), urban residents (6.39 {+/-} 1.61 vs. 4.37 {+/-} 1.30, p<0.001), and clinical pharmacists (7.10 {+/-} 1.68, p=0.001). Conclusion: Pharmacists practicing in Lahore, Pakistan demonstrated positive attitudes but moderate knowledge and inconsistent counseling practices. Key gaps were identified in drug-supplement interaction knowledge and counseling practices. These findings underscore the need for organized education, continued training, and regulatory supervision to improve counseling practices of dietary supplements.

Aims To develop the Bowel Irrigation Questionnaire (BIQ), a patient-reported experience measure (PREM) designed to assess the user experience of transanal irrigation (TAI). Methods Statements were generated through literature review and qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and product users. Statements were rated on a 6-point content validity index scale through an international three-round online Delphi survey by 20 expert panel members. Consensus attainment was defined based on percentage agreement, statements which did not meet consensus were discussed at a final international online consensus meeting. The content validity of the PREM was evaluated through cognitive interviews and the Questionnaire on Questionnaires (QQ-10). Reliability was assessed using a test-retest design, where users completed the BIQ on two occasions one week apart. Results 215 statements were generated from 9 multi-disciplinary qualitative interviews and literature review. Statements were refined to reduce repetition and ensure clarity. 73 statements grouped into 11 domains were reviewed through the Delphi survey. Following the Delphi survey and clinical consensus meeting, the preliminary BIQ consisted of 15 items. Six cognitive interviews were conducted, resulting in a finalised BIQ of 16 items. 32 product users completed both the QQ-10 and test-retest study, the results of which demonstrated good content validity and temporal stability respectively. Conclusions The Bowel Irrigation Questionnaire is a novel PREM designed to assess the user experience of TAI in both clinical and research settings. The instrument demonstrates good validity, acceptability and temporal stability, supporting its use as a reliable measure of patient experience.

Background: Retrieval of adverse event reports based on coded drug-event co-occurrence enables large-scale pharmacovigilance analyses, but yields candidate reports rather than validated cases, risking misinterpretation if used alone. Aim: To develop and apply a framework for identification and characterization of clinically meaningful case series in pharmacovigilance. Methods: We conducted two case studies. The first developed and refined the framework in an information-rich setting, focusing on drug-induced impulsivity across selected drugs; the second tested its applicability in a more routine, information-poor setting, focusing on drug-induced suicidality. Results: In Case 1, non-relevant reports were frequent for drugs with uncertain evidence and negative controls ({approx}20-40%) compared to drugs with established causal roles (4%). The emerging framework assessed relevance based on exposure, event, drug-event relationship, and population. For suspected adverse drug reactions, relevant reports were further characterized by reporter suspicion and evidentiary qualifiers supporting or refuting causality; higher suspicion was associated with more supportive qualifiers. Applied to Case 2, the framework ruled out 69% of reports as non-relevant but highlighted substantial non-assessability (17%). Conclusions: In pharmacovigilance, retrieval is not equivalent to case identification. Relevance is question-specific and shaped by how reports are captured, processed, and retrieved. This can be especially critical for emerging or bias-prone safety questions. Transparent and reproducible case definition and adjudication are essential for interpretable analyses.

Background Hand hygiene is a core component of infection prevention and control, yet evidence on the effectiveness of hand hygiene interventions in health-care facilities in low-income and middle-income countries has not been comprehensively synthesized alongside implementation barriers and enablers. We assessed the effectiveness of hand hygiene interventions in these settings and examined implementation conditions shaping success. Methods We conducted a systematic review drawing on a University of North Carolina evidence map of environmental health services in low-income and middle-income country health-care facilities, which searched PubMed, Scopus, and Global Health and was supplemented by hand-searching. Hand-hygiene-specific records were restricted to peer-reviewed English-language studies published between Jan 1, 2015, and Nov 28, 2025; backward citation chasing identified additional eligible records. Random-effects meta-analysis was done for studies with extractable pre-intervention and post-intervention hand hygiene compliance data. Other outcomes were synthesized using effect-direction methods. Barriers and enablers were synthesized thematically. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO, CRD420251252831. Findings We screened 656 records and included 57 studies from 32 low-income and middle-income countries. Fifteen studies contributed to meta-analysis. Hand hygiene interventions were associated with higher post-intervention than pre-intervention compliance (pooled risk ratio 1{middle dot}45, 95% CI 1{middle dot}20-1{middle dot}74), with substantial heterogeneity (I2=98%). Most studies used non-randomized designs. Multimodal WHO-style strategies and system-change interventions focused on alcohol-based hand rub availability, placement, or related infrastructure were the most common intervention categories. Effect-direction synthesis suggested favorable effects for compliance and system-related outcomes, whereas evidence for reductions in health-care-associated infections was less consistent. Common barriers included supply shortages, weak audit and data systems, staffing and workload pressures, and WASH infrastructure constraints; common enablers included training, monitoring and feedback, leadership support, reliable supplies, and implementation support. Conclusion Hand hygiene interventions can improve observed compliance in low-income and middle-income country health-care facilities, but sustained gains depend on system supports that make hand hygiene feasible at the point of care. Programs should pair training and behavior-change strategies with reliable supplies, functional WASH infrastructure, audit-and-feedback routines, leadership accountability, and protected implementation time.

Insomnia is a transdiagnostic risk factor for depression and anxiety and frequently co-occurs with both conditions. Sleep restriction therapy (SRT) is considered a key active component of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), is now delivered without therapist involvement via digital platforms such as SleepFix. Existing meta-analytic evidence suggests that digital behavioural therapy for insomnia (dBT-I) may improve anxiety and depression, but participant-level evidence remains limited. This individual participant data meta-analysis pooled data from two Australian randomised controlled trials (dBT-I n=220; control n=270; 78.3% female; mean age 66.0 years) to examine whether dBT-I, with SRT as the central component and delivered through the SleepFix program, reduces depressive and anxiety symptoms in adults with insomnia disorder, who were not specifically selected for anxiety and depression. We measured anxiety using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale and depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 or Geriatric Depression Scale-15, with depression scores standardised to a common scale assuming a shared standard deviation of 4. We fitted linear mixed-effects models with random intercepts for participants and trials at Weeks 8 and 16, including baseline GAD-7 (mean 6.1, SD 4.8) in the anxiety model. dBT-I significantly reduced anxiety at Week 8 (mean difference -0.94 GAD-7 points, 95% CI -1.80 to -0.09, p=.030) and Week 16 (-0.94 GAD-7 points, 95% CI -1.86 to -0.02, p=.044), and depression at Week 8 (-0.40 SDs, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.14, p=.003) and Week 16 (-0.44 SDs, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.17, p=.002), with no evidence effects diminished between timepoints. However, the reductions were less than the smallest detectable difference for these questionnaires (i.e., 1 point). These findings support dBT-I as a scalable intervention with modest mental health benefits extending beyond insomnia.

Abstract Background: Iron deficiency anaemia remains a major public health problem in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly among children, adolescents, women of reproductive age, and pregnant women. Although daily oral iron supplementation is the standard treatment, uncertainty remains regarding whether intermittent dosing provides comparable efficacy with better tolerability and acceptability. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of daily versus intermittent oral iron or iron-folic acid supplementation for treating anaemia in LMICs. Methods: Four electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched from inception to July 2025. Randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and prospective cohort studies conducted in LMICs among anaemic children, adolescents, women of reproductive age, and pregnant women were included. Primary outcomes were changes in haemoglobin concentration and serum ferritin from baseline to study end. Secondary outcomes included adherence, adverse effects, anaemia recovery, and maternal and fetal outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis, subgroup analysis, and GRADE certainty assessment were performed. Results: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, with 13 studies (19 comparisons; 724 participants receiving daily supplementation and 948 receiving intermittent supplementation) included in the meta-analysis. Daily iron supplementation was associated with a small but statistically significant increase in haemoglobin compared with intermittent regimens (MD=0.34 g/dL; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.60; I2=87.8%). Subgroup analysis demonstrated benefits among children (MD=0.44 g/dL; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.68; I2=68.1%) and pregnant women (MD=0.79 g/dL; 95% CI: 0.04, 1.55; I2=87.8%), whereas no significant difference was observed among adolescents. Daily supplementation also resulted in higher serum ferritin concentrations (MD=4.48 ug/L; 95% CI: 0.37, 8.59). Intermittent regimens were associated with higher adherence and fewer gastrointestinal adverse effects. Conclusion: Very low-certainty evidence suggests daily supplementation may produce a small increase in haemoglobin and serum ferritin compared with intermittent regimens, although the magnitude and clinical significance of these differences remain uncertain. Intermittent regimens were associated with fewer gastrointestinal side effects and better adherence. Where adherence or treatment tolerability is a concern, intermittent regimens may represent a pragmatic alternative to daily supplementation, particularly in resource-constrained LMIC settings. Keywords: Anaemia, iron supplementation, daily, intermittent, haemoglobin, serum ferritin.

Background: Placebo responding involves the reduction of symptoms in response to contextual features of an intervention (e.g., verbal suggestions), yet it is characterized by pronounced heterogeneity. Although verbal suggestions are widely recognised as a hallmark method for inducing placebo responses, an open question is whether variability in placebo responding can be partly attributed to individual differences in trait responsiveness to verbal suggestions (REVS). We conducted a pre-registered meta-analysis (PROSPERO registration number CRD420250654692) to quantitatively synthesize available research on the association between trait REVS and placebo responding. Methods: PsycInfo, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched up to June 2026 for original clinical or experimental studies involving both the assessment of REVS and symptom measures (self-report, behavioural, and/or physiological) in response to an inactive intervention (placebo). Results: Of 1,512 search results, 24 articles presenting 66 correlations between REVS and placebo responding were analysed (N = 1,137). A multi-level meta-analysis revealed a significant, albeit weak, positive correlation between REVS and placebo responses, r = 0.18 [95% CI: 0.13, 0.24], such that individuals with higher REVS reported greater symptom relief in response to the placebo. Meta-regression analyses did not identify any significant moderators of the correlation between REVS and placebo responding and sensitivity analyses based on Bayesian subgroup estimates indicated that the aggregate correlation was stable across methodological quality indicators and study features. Conclusion: These findings suggest that individual differences in REVS may partly explain variability in symptom reduction in response to placebos, with implications for the sources of variance in placebo effects in experimental and applied contexts.

Background: Systematic reviews of clinical prediction models increasingly include studies using artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) methods alongside traditional multivariable regression approaches. A previously published Excel tool enabled standardised data extraction using the CHARMS checklist and risk of bias assessment using PROBAST. The recent publication of the PROBAST+AI framework, which distinguishes the assessment of model development quality from the assessment of model evaluation risk of bias and assesses applicability in both parts, necessitates an updated digital instrument applicable across prediction modelling methods. Methods: We updated an open-access Excel tool to incorporate the full PROBAST+AI framework. The updated template incorporates structural separation between assessment of model development quality and model evaluation risk of bias, with applicability assessed in both parts. It also incorporates updated signalling questions, including those addressing methodological issues particularly relevant to AI/ML, and automates the generation of summary tables and graphical displays. Results: The updated tool (CHARMS & PROBAST+AI Template) contains 11 worksheets and supports data extraction and appraisal for up to 30 prediction models. Dedicated, linked worksheets enable separate assessment of model development and model evaluation, with Domain 4 distinguishing among Apparent, Internal, and External evaluation settings. Key updates include dedicated assessments for predictor pre-processing, class imbalance handling and recalibration, data leakage prevention, and replication of the full model development pipeline within resampling procedures. Automated sheets dynamically format tables and summary charts covering PROBAST+AI parts. Conclusions: The CHARMS & PROBAST+AI Excel template provides a standardised, user-friendly, and rigorous digital framework for systematic reviewers appraising traditional statistical and AI-driven clinical prediction models.

Clinical trials often enrol populations that differ from those who ultimately receive the interventions, raising concerns about external validity and health equity. Trial registries could provide an early opportunity to assess representativeness, but it is unclear whether registry data contain sufficient information to enable such assessments. This study evaluated the feasibility of using registry data to assess representativeness in Phase II and III pharmacological randomised controlled trials. A search of ClinicalTrials.gov from December 2024 to January 2025 identified trials with results posted after 1 January 2023 across cardiovascular disease (CVD) excluding stroke, diabetes mellitus, and selected mental health disorders. Of 1,328 records screened, 98 trials met inclusion criteria (51 Phase III, 47 Phase II). Reporting completeness was variable, particularly in Phase II studies. CVD and diabetes trials predominantly included middle-aged to older adults, while mental health trials recruited mainly individuals aged 36 to 50 years. Across CVD and mental health trials, participants were largely male. Reporting of BMI, contraception, and comorbidity criteria was inconsistent, though available data suggested these factors influenced sample composition. Fewer than 10% of trials reported equity-relevant characteristics beyond age and sex, and none addressed intersectionality. Assessing equity using registry data is feasible but constrained by incomplete and inconsistent reporting.

Background: Adverse drug withdrawal events (ADWEs) are a key safety concern during deprescribing but remain poorly explored in pharmacovigilance systems. Objectives: To identify and compare ADWE signals across drug classes, different drugs within drug classes, and across patient characteristics, countries, and over time. Methods: A case/non-case disproportionality analysis was conducted in FDA-FAERS and EMA-EudraVigilance pharmacovigilance databases, with stratification by age (adults: 18-64, older adults: [&ge;]65), sex (male/female), reporting time (2004-2023 in 5-year intervals), and country (for EMA data). Disproportionality analysis (quantitative signal detection) was used to detect signals between ADWEs and drugs using the proportional reporting rate (PRR[&ge;]2), reporting odds ratio (ROR>1), and information component (IC>0) with case count [&ge;]5. Results: Overall, 158,501 reports (FDA-FAERS 145,514; EMA-EudraVigilance 12,987) included drug-event pairs related to ADWEs. In FDA-FAERS, clobetasone (IC=5.58; PRR=79.18; ROR=176.90) showed the strongest ADWE signals, followed by hydromorphone (4.85; 29.94; 37.37), hydrocodone, and paroxetine. In EMA-EudraVigilance, ethyl loflazepate (IC=6.01; PRR=119.80; ROR=197.53), clobetasone (5.39; 102.73; 155.10), veralipride, and levomethadone had the strongest signals. Most drugs maintained positive ADWE signals in analysis stratified into adults and older adults. However, among the top 10 drugs (based on highest IC values), buprenorphine/naloxone, desvenlafaxine, and baclofen in FDA-FAERS (ICs 4.95-6.05) showed stronger signals in older adults. A sex-based difference was observed, with paroxetine, venlafaxine, and buprenorphine/naloxone showing a stronger positive signal in females in both databases, whereas several opioids had stronger signals in males versus females across both databases. Conclusion: This study suggests ADWE signals for some medications differ by age and sex, potentially indicating different risks for withdrawal effects.

Background The Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score is an internationally validated instrument for identifying bowel dysfunction following anterior resection for rectal cancer. Although widely used, it has been shown to have limited sensitivity for capturing the impact of LARS on daily-life and response to treatment. We have therefore developed a novel patient-reported outcome measure (PROM): the LARS Impact and Consequences Assessment Tool (LARS-ICAT). Methods Initial development of LARS-ICAT followed a five-stage process following established PROM development guidance. Stage one established the conceptual foundation through previously published Delphi consensus. Stage two involved item generation, followed by evaluation of content validity through patient focus groups (n=11) in stage three. Stage four comprised iterative expert review and refinement through clinical consensus with patient involvement. Stage five involved cognitive interviews with patients conducted across five rounds (n=23). Results Several items identified through the Delphi consensus were reworded as they included multiple concepts. A one-month recall period was selected, with six and four response options for symptom and consequence items respectively. Additional consequence items, including impact on sleep and transport use, were incorporated. Focus groups and clinicians emphasised the importance of capturing individual symptom burden, leading to the addition of symptom bother scales. These iterative refinements culminated in LARS-ICAT v2.6. Conclusions LARS-ICAT is a novel PROM designed to assess symptom burden and treatment response in LARS. Future studies will assess its psychometric properties. Once validated, LARS-ICAT will provide a comprehensive, patient-centred assessment of LARS, enhancing our ability to manage this challenging condition.