Background: As the European population ages, it becomes increasingly important to promote and facilitate healthy and active ageing and age-friendly societies. Professionals across a range of disciplines and sectors need knowledge and skills to support both. Objective: This scoping review aims to identify and map the literature on learning needs, learning outcomes and respective curricula in healthy and active ageing and age-friendly society concepts. Inclusion criteria: Studies focused on the teaching/learning process in healthy and active ageing and/or age-friendly society, of any design type, are eligible. Included studies may focus on undergraduate, postgraduate or continuing education and on any aspect of the educational process, such as needs analysis, content delivery, learner satisfaction/acceptability, or education outcome. Methods: This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for conducting scoping reviews. Four electronic databases, PubMed, EBSCO (Academic Search Complete), Scopus and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), will be searched, limited to studies published from 1 st January 2000. Text language will be limited to English, German, Greek, Portuguese, Finnish, and Slovenian. Google Scholar and Research Gate will be searched for grey literature, limited to the first 50 results of each. Title and abstract screening, followed by full-text screening will be undertaken independently by at least two reviewers. The JBI extraction tool will be adapted for data extraction. Quality assessment will be conducted using a tool developed by Hawker and colleagues. A narrative synthesis will outline the data in relation to the aims and objectives outlined.

BACKGROUND: Early Health Technology Assessment (EHTA) is an evolving field in health policy which aims to provide decision support and mitigate risk during early medical device innovation. The clinician is a key stakeholder in this process and their role has traditionally been confined to assessing device efficacy and safety alone. There is however, no data exploring their role in this process and how they can contribute towards it. This motivated us to carry out a systematic review to delineate the role of the clinician in EHTA as per the PRISMA guidelines.
METHODS: A systematic search of peer reviewed literature was undertaken across PUBMED, OVID Medline and Web of science up till June 2018. Studies that were suitable for inclusion focused on clinician input in health technology assessment or early medical device innovation. A qualitative approach was utilised to generate themes on how clinicians could contribute in general and specific areas of EHTA. Data was manually extracted by the authors and themes were agreed in consensus using a grounded theory framework. The specific stages included: All stages of EHTA, Basic research on mechanisms, Targeting for specific product, Proof of principle and Prototype and product development. Bias was assessed utilising the NICE Qualitative checklist.
RESULTS: A total of 33 articles met the inclusion criteria for the review. Areas identified in which the clinicians could contribute to EHTA included: i) needs driven problem solving, ii) conformity assessment of MDs, iii) economic evaluation of MDs and iv) addressing the conflicts in interest. For clinicians\' input across the various specific areas of EHTA, an innovation framework was generated based on the subthemes extracted.
CONCLUSIONS: The following review has identified the various segments in which clinicians can contribute to EHTA to inform stakeholders and has also proposed an innovation framework.

Introduction: To ensure best-quality education in orthopaedic trauma, the AOTrauma Education Commission conducted a Global Needs Analysis with practising surgeons worldwide. Material and methods: During July to November 2012, an email invitation to complete an online set of 30 questions in eight languages was sent to our members and associates in all countries through AOTrauma\'s regional networks. Non-members were invited to participate through collaboration with orthopaedic societies. Results: A total of 3,790 surgeons practising orthopaedic trauma (49%), orthopaedic (15%), general trauma (15%) and specialty orthopaedic (13%) surgeons responded worldwide. Seventy per cent completed all questions, and the top 10 countries accounted for half the responses. The top 3 areas of educational need were orthopaedic trauma, joint replacement and preservation, and pelvis and acetabulum. Aspects influencing likelihood to attend face-to-face courses were: expert faculty, focus on a specific topic, clear objectives, and discussion and feedback from experts. Barriers to attending courses were time away from practice, cost and lack of availability or access. Conclusion: The Global Needs Analysis helped our educational committees to identify short- and mid-term priorities over recent years. Adjustments in our planning have helped meet the needs of our audience on a global, regional and national level.