The evolution of our lives has forced changes to the healthcare system and consequently established healthcare marketing as an essential element of health services, including primary health care (PHC). This article aims to analyze the size, structure, and dynamics of research on primary healthcare marketing to identify the main topics and research trends in this area. The authors conducted a bibliographic analysis based on the methods of performance analysis and scientific mapping. The bibliographical analysis covered 1981 publications selected from the Scopus database and was carried out with the use of the MS Excel and VOSviewer applications. The results were supplemented with an in-depth analysis of 34 publications selected based on bibliographic coupling analysis to determine key research trends and results, which increased the understanding of the research area. The conducted research proves that the issue of marketing in primary health care is rarely addressed by researchers, which translates into very limited research results and little impact on the decision-making process in this area. This research field requires much greater commitment, especially in the areas indicated in the future research agenda recommendations.

This International Society of Lymphology (ISL) Consensus Document is the latest revision of the 1995 Document for the evaluation and management of peripheral lymphedema (1). It is based upon modifications: [A] suggested and published following the 1997 XVI International Congress of Lymphology (ICL) in Madrid, Spain (2), discussed at the 1999 XVII ICL in Chennai, India (3), and considered confirmed at the 2000 (ISL) Executive Committee meeting in Hinterzarten, Germany (4); [B] derived from integration of discussions and written comments obtained during and following the 2001 XVIII ICL in Genoa, Italy as modified at the 2003 ISL Executive Committee meeting in Cordoba, Argentina (5); [C] suggested from comments, criticisms, and rebuttals as published in the December 2004 issue of Lymphology (6); [D] discussed in both the 2005 XX ICL in Salvador, Brazil and the 2007 XXI ICL in Shanghai, China and modified at the 2008 Executive Committee meeting in Naples, Italy (7,8); [E] modified from discussions and written comments from the 2009 XXII ICL in Sydney, Australia, the 2011 XXIII ICL in Malmo, Sweden, the 2012 Executive Committee Meetings (9); [F] discussions at the 2013 XXIV ICL in Rome, Italy, and the 2015 XXV ICL in San Francisco, USA, as well as multiple written comments and feedback from Executive Committee and other ISL members during the 2016 drafting (10); informal discussions at the XXVI ICL in Barcelona, Spain; [G] discussions at a dedicated, focused Post-Congress session at the XXVII ICL in Iguazu, Argentina (2019) followed by additional written comments from the Executive Committee and others (11); and [H] discussions and written comments from the XXVIII ICL in Athens, Greece (2021), and the XXIX ICL in Genoa, Italy (2023). The document attempts to amalgamate the broad spectrum of protocols and practices advocated worldwide for the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral lymphedema into a coordinated proclamation representing a \"Consensus\" of the international community based on various levels of evidence. The document is not meant to override individual clinical considerations for complex patients nor to impede clinical treatment or research progress. It is not meant to be a legal formulation from which variations could be used to describe or define medical malpractice. The Society understands that in some clinics the method of treatment derives from national standards while in others access to medical equipment, technical expertise, and supplies is limited; therefore, the suggested assessments and treatments might be impractical. Adaptability and inclusiveness do come at the price that members can rightly be critical of what they see as vagueness or imprecision in definitions, qualifiers in the choice of words ( e.g., the use of \"may ... perhaps ... unclear\", etc.) and mentions (albeit without endorsement) of treatment options supported by limited hard data (few randomized control trials). Most members are frustrated by the reality that NO treatment method has really undergone a satisfactory meta-analysis (let alone rigorous, randomized, controlled study). With this understanding, the absence of optimally conducted clinical trials and definitive answers, and with emerging technologies and new approaches and discoveries on the horizon, some degree of uncertainty, ambiguity, and flexibility along with dissatisfaction with current lymphedema evaluation and management is appropriate and to be expected. We continue to struggle to keep the document concise while balancing the need for depth, breadth, and details. With these considerations in mind, we believe that this 2023 version presents a Consensus that embraces the entire ISL membership, acknowledges national standards but rises above them, identifies, and stimulates promising areas for future research, and represents the best judgment of the ISL member-ship on how to approach patients with peripheral lymphedema in the light of currently available evidence. Therefore, the document has been and should continue to be challenged and debated in the pages of Lymphology (e.g., as Letters to the Editor) and ideally will remain a continued focal point for robust discussion at local, national, and international conferences in lymphology and related disciplines. We further anticipate as experience evolves and new ideas and technologies emerge that this \"living document\" will undergo further periodic revision and refinement as the practice and conceptual foundations of medicine and specifically lymphology change and advance.

As the global demand for healthcare services continues to grow, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the healthcare ecosystem has become a pressing concern. Information systems are transforming the healthcare delivery process, shifting the focus of healthcare services from passive disease treatment to proactive health prevention and the healthcare management model from hospital-centric to patient-centric. This study focuses on reviewing research in IS journals on the topic of e-health and is dedicated to constructing a theoretical model of intelligent health to provide a research basis for future discussions in this field. In addition, as the innovation of intelligent healthcare services has led to changes in its elements (e.g., an increase in the number of stakeholders), there is an urgent need to sort out and analyze the existing research.

There is growing interest in menopause discrimination in healthcare, the workplace and beyond. However, there is a dearth of research on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ+) experiences of the menopause. This article reports on a scoping review of the recent literature which identified a very limited number of articles and a wide range of knowledge gaps. This is discussed in relation to LGBTQ+ wider health, healthcare and workplace inequalities, and heteronormative and cisnormative conceptualisations of the menopause. A research agenda is proposed. Research should: be intersectional; differentiate between LGBTQ+ sub-groups; aim to understand how menopause experiences impact and are impacted by minority sexuality/gender identities; and examine how menopause healthcare and workplace support can be LGBTQ+ inclusive. Such research is urgently needed to ensure that LGBTQ+ people are fully included in menopause justice discussions and solutions.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: In the big data era, where corporations commodify health data, non-fungible tokens (NFTs) present a transformative avenue for patient empowerment and control. NFTs are unique digital assets on the blockchain, representing ownership of digital objects, including health data. By minting their data as NFTs, patients can track access, monetize its use, and build secure, private health information systems. However, research on NFTs in healthcare is in its infancy, warranting a comprehensive review.
UNASSIGNED: This study conducted a systematic literature review and thematic analysis of NFTs in healthcare to identify use cases, design models, and key challenges. Five multidisciplinary research databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, IEEE Explore, Elsevier Science Direct) were searched. The approach involved four stages: paper collection, inclusion/exclusion criteria application, screening, full-text reading, and quality assessment. A classification and coding framework was employed. Thematic analysis followed six steps: data familiarization, initial code generation, theme searching, theme review, theme definition/naming, and report production.
UNASSIGNED: Analysis of 19 selected papers revealed three primary use cases: patient-centric data management, supply chain management for data provenance, and digital twin development. Notably, most solutions were prototypes or frameworks without real-world implementations. Four overarching themes emerged: data governance (ownership, tracking, privacy), data monetization (commercialization, incentivization, sharing), data protection, and data storage. The focus lies on user-controlled, private, and secure health data solutions. Additionally, data commodification is explored, with mechanisms proposed to incentivize data maintenance and sharing. NFTs are also suggested for tracking medical products in supply chains, ensuring data integrity and provenance. Ethereum and similar platforms dominate NFT minting, while compact NFT storage options are being explored for faster data access.
UNASSIGNED: NFTs offer significant potential for secure, traceable, decentralized healthcare data exchange systems. However, challenges exist, including dependence on blockchain, interoperability issues, and associated costs. The review identified research gaps, such as developing dual ownership models and data pricing strategies. Building an open standard for interoperability and adoption is crucial. The scalability, security, and privacy of NFT-backed healthcare applications require further investigation. Thus, this study proposes a research agenda for adopting NFTs in healthcare, focusing on governance, storage models, and perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Despite a large growth in evidence on violence against women (VAW) over the last 25 years, VAW persists, as do gaps in the field\'s knowledge of how to prevent and respond to it. To ensure that research on VAW in low- and middle-income countries (LIMCs) is addressing the most significant gaps in knowledge, and to prioritise evidence needs to reduce VAW and better support victims/survivors, the Sexual Violence Research Initiative (SVRI) and Equality Institute (EQI) led a process of developing a global shared research agenda (GSRA) on VAW in LMICs.
METHODS: The GSRA was developed through a six-stage adaptation of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, which draws on the principle of the \'wisdom of the crowd\'. These steps included: a review of the literature on VAW in LMICs and development of domains; the generation of research questions within four domains by an Advisory Group; the consolidation of research questions; scoring of research questions by a Global Expert Group and the Advisory Group according to three criteria (applicability, effectiveness and equity); consultation and validation of the findings with the Advisory Group; and wide dissemination of the findings.
RESULTS: The highest ranked research questions in the GSRA pertain to the domain of Intervention research, with some highly ranked questions also pertaining to the domain of Understanding VAW in its multiple forms. Questions under the other two domains, Improving existing interventions, and Methodological and measurement gaps, were not prioritised as highly by experts. There was strong consistency in top ranked research questions according to experts\' characteristics, albeit with some important differences according to experts\' gender, occupation and geographical location.
CONCLUSIONS: The GSRA findings suggest that currently the VAW field is shifting towards intervention research after several decades of building evidence on understanding VAW, including prevalence, drivers and impacts of violence. The findings also suggest a strong emphasis on under-served populations, and under-researched forms of VAW. Future priority setting exercises in LMICs that seek to decolonise knowledge should ensure that methodologies, and modalities of engagement, put diverse voices at the centre of engagement. Trial registration Not applicable.

BACKGROUND: James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) produce \'Top 10\' lists of health and care research priorities through a structured, shared decision-making process with patients or service users, carers and health or care professionals who identify questions that are most important to them. To date, over 150 PSPs in different areas of health and care have published research priorities. Some PSPs share similar priorities, which could be combined, promoted and addressed through collaborative research to increase value and reduce research waste.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify overarching themes common to JLA PSP priorities across different areas of health and care.
METHODS: Our analysis included \'Top 10\' research priorities produced by UK-based JLA PSPs between 2016 and 2020. The priorities were coded deductively by the Health Research Classification System (HRCS) health category and research activity. We then carried out online workshops with patients, service users and carers to generate new codes not already captured by this framework. Within each code, multistakeholder inductive thematic analysis was used to identify overarching themes, defined as encompassing priorities from three or more PSPs covering two or more health categories. We used codesign methods to produce an interactive tool for end users to navigate the overarching themes.
RESULTS: Five hundred and fifteen research priorities from 51 PSPs were included in our analysis. The priorities together encompassed 20 of 21 HRCS health categories, the most common being \'generic health relevance\' (22%), \'mental health\' (18%) and \'musculoskeletal\' (14%). We identified 89 overarching themes and subthemes, which we organised into a hierarchy with seven top-level themes: quality of life, caregivers and families, causes and prevention, screening and diagnosis, treatment and management, services and systems and social influences and impacts.
CONCLUSIONS: There are many overarching themes common to research priorities across multiple areas of health and care. To facilitate new research and research funding, we have developed an interactive tool to help researchers, funders and patients or service users to explore these priority topics. This is freely available to download online.
UNASSIGNED: Patients or service users and carers were involved throughout the study, including deciding the aims, designing the study, analysing priorities to identify themes, interpreting and reporting the findings.

ACMT recognizes the pivotal role of high-quality research in advancing medical science. As such, the establishment of a formal research agenda for ACMT is a leap forward in communicating the priorities of the College, its members, and the patient populations we serve. This thoughtfully crafted agenda will serve as a strategic compass for ACMT, guiding our pursuit of scientific discovery, fostering innovation, and enhancing outcomes for patients and communities affected by poisonings and exposures.

BACKGROUND: Health professions education (HPE) research in the General Practice domain (GP-HPE) is vital for high-quality healthcare. Collaboration among GP-HPE researchers is crucial but challenging. Formulating a research agenda, involving stakeholders, and fostering inter-institutional collaboration can address these challenges and connect educational research and practice.
METHODS: We used Q-methodology to explore perspectives on GP-HPE research of participants from all Dutch postgraduate GP training institutes. Participants individually sorted statements based on the relevance of future GP-HPE research for educational practice. Data analysis comprised inverted factor analysis, rotation, and qualitative interpretation of configurations of all statements. The National Meeting on Educational Research took a participatory approach.
RESULTS: We included 73 participants with diverse involvement in GP-HPE research. We identified five distinct perspectives, each representing a research focus area for developing and innovating GP education: the clinician scientist, the socially engaged GP, the specific GP identity, the GP as an entrepreneur, and the GP engaged in lifelong learning.
CONCLUSIONS: The resulting five perspectives align with General Practice hallmarks. Q-methodology and a participatory approach facilitated collaboration among stakeholders. Successful inter-institutional collaboration requires a common goal, neutral leadership, participant commitment, regular meetings, audit trail support, process transparency, and reflexivity. Future research should address evidence gaps within these perspectives.
CONCLUSIONS: Using Q-methodology turned out to be valuable for compiling a national research agenda for GP-HPE research. The research process helped to cross boundaries between researchers in different institutions, thus putting inter-institutional collaborative advantage center stage. Our approach could provide a conceivable procedure for HPE researchers worldwide.