BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemotherapy (CTX) has historically been the primary treatment for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC), with limited alternative options. The therapeutic landscape experienced a paradigm shift following the results of the EV-302 and Checkmate-901 trials, which led to the approval of Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab (EV-P) as the preferred first-line treatment, and nivolumab plus CTX for those unable to receive the preferred regimen. Currently, further investigations are underway to explore PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in the initial treatment of aUC.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic search across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-CTX combinations versus CTX alone as first-line treatment for advanced UC. Employing a random-effects model, we pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS: Our analysis encompassed 3 RCTs, involving 2162 participants, with 51.16% randomized to combination therapy with platinum-based CTX. Compared to CTX alone, immune-chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75-0.93; P < .01), progression-free survival (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.86; P < .01), and objective response rate (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.06-1.36; P < .01), while elevating the risk of immune-related adverse events (P-value = .02).
CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of RCTs, ICI plus CTX demonstrated a significant association with improved survival at the expense of an increased risk of immune-related adverse events. Therefore, our findings suggest that this combination should be considered as an initial treatment for aUC in platinum-eligible patients who cannot receive EV-P.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 (Coronavirus disease of 2019) pandemic caused major disruption to nursing research, especially qualitative research. Researchers had to overcome numerous challenges that potentially impacted the quality of the studies carried out.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the characteristics and quality of reporting qualitative nursing articles on the COVID-19 pandemic.
METHODS: A systematic search and critical review using content analysis was conducted on published nurse-led articles using a qualitative approach related to the COVID-19 pandemic. A combination of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) checklists and additional items identified from the literature were used to assess the characteristics and overall quality of reporting of qualitative research.
RESULTS: Out of 63,494 articles screened, 444 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were published in high-impact, Quartile 1 journals, with the majority originating from the USA. Common themes included workforce experiences and the impact of pandemic restrictions. Methodological quality varied, with a notable underuse of standardized reporting checklists. Despite pandemic-induced challenges in data collection, interviews remained the predominant method. However, the adoption of remote research methods and analysis software was limited.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings underscore the resilience and adaptability of nursing researchers during the pandemic. High-quality publications in top-tier journals indicate rigorous academic standards. However, the low utilization of reporting checklists suggests a need for greater emphasis on methodological transparency and adherence to established quality guidelines. This review highlights the importance of enhancing qualitative research practices to improve the rigor and reliability of studies, particularly in crisis contexts.

Invalidation from healthcare practitioners is an experience shared by many patients, especially those marginalized or living with contested conditions (e.g., chronic pain, fibromyalgia, etc.). Invalidation can include not taking someone\'s testimony seriously, imposing one\'s thoughts, discrediting someone\'s emotions, or not perceiving someone\'s testimony as equal and competent. Epistemic injustices, that is, the disqualification of a person as a knower, are a form of invalidation. Epistemic injustices have been used as a theoretical framework to understand invalidation that occurs in the patient-healthcare provider relationship. However, to date, the different recommendations to achieve epistemic justice have not been listed, analyzed, nor compared yet. This paper aims at better understanding the state of the literature and to critically review possible avenues to achieve epistemic justice in healthcare. A systematic and critical review of the existing literature on epistemic justice was conducted. The search in four databases identified 629 articles, from which 35 were included in the review. Strategies to promote epistemic justice that can be applied to healthcare are mapped in the literature and sorted in six different approaches to epistemic justice, including virtuous, structural, narrative, cognitive, and partnership approaches, as well as resistance strategies. These strategies are critically appraised. A patient partnership approach based on the Montreal Model, implemented at all levels of healthcare systems, seems promising to promote epistemic justice in healthcare.

Over the past three decades, health equity has become a guiding framework for documenting, explaining, and informing the promotion of population health. With these developments, scholars have widened public health\'s aperture, bringing systems of oppression sharply into focus. Additionally, some researchers in disability and health have advocated for utilizing socially grounded frameworks to investigate the health of disabled people. Yet, naming ableism, much less operationalizing it for the empirical study of health, remains scant. This paper critically reviews the study of ableism as a social determinant of disabled people\'s health within population health research. First, we provide an orientation to the present state of this literature by looking to the past. We briefly trace a history of traditional approaches to studying disability and health and alternatives that have emerged from critiques of the individualized lens that has dominated this work. Next, we delineate the operation of ableism across social levels. We characterize how ableism has been studied in population health in terms of levels of analysis (intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and structural) and measures of interest. To conclude, we discuss hinderances to and promising avenues toward population health research that advances health equity for disabled people.

Quality improvement (QI) has become an integral part of healthcare. Despite efforts to improve the reporting of QI through frameworks such as the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines, there is no standard or well-accepted guide to evaluate published QI for rigor, validity, generalizability, and applicability. User\'s Guides for evaluation of published clinical research have been employed routinely for over 25 years; however, similar tools for critical appraisal of QI are limited and uncommonly used. In this article we propose an approach to guide the critical review of QI reports focused on evaluating the methodology, improvement results, and applicability and feasibility for implementation in other settings. The resulting Quality Improvement Critical Knowledge (QUICK) Tool can be used by those reviewing manuscripts submitted for publication, as well as healthcare providers seeking to understand how to apply published QI to their local context.

The use of research evidence in policy making is a complex and challenging process that has a long history in various fields, especially in healthcare. Different terms and concepts have been used to describe the relationship between research and policy, but they often lack clarity and consensus. To address this gap, several strategies and models have been proposed to facilitate evidence informed policy making and to identify the key factors and mechanisms involved. This study aims to critically review the existing models of evidence informed policy making (EIPM) in healthcare and to assess their strengths and limitations.
A systematic search and review conducted to identify and critically assess EIPM models in healthcare. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases as major electronic databases and applied predefined inclusion criteria to select the models. We also checked the citations of the included models to find other scholars\' perspectives. Each model was described and critiqued each model in detail and discussed their features and limitations.
Nine models of EIPM in healthcare were identified. While models had some strengths in comprehension, flexibility and theoretical foundations, analysis also identified limitations including: presupposing rational policymaking; lacking alternatives for time-sensitive situations; not capturing policy complexity; neglecting unintended effects; limited context considerations; inadequate complexity concepts; limited collaboration guidance; and unspecified evidence adaptations.
The reviewed models provide useful frameworks for EIPM but need further improvement to address their limitations. Concepts from sociology of knowledge, change theory and complexity science can enrich the models. Future EIPM models should better account for the complexity of research-policy relationships and provide tailored strategies based on the policy context.

OBJECTIVE: A critical review examined how childrens participation rights as represented in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child inform the work of pediatric teams in healthcare settings.
METHODS: We systematically searched peer-reviewed literature on the enactment of child participation rights, within the context of pediatric teams. Articles were evaluated using the LEGEND (Let Evidence Guide Every New Decision) tool. Data extraction and analysis highlighted themes and disparities between articles, as well as gaps. A total of 25 studies were selected.
RESULTS: We reviewed studies from around the globe, with the majority of papers from the UK. Qualitative and mixed methods approaches were administered. The following observations were made: (1) limited language of children\'s rights exists in the literature, (2) lack of information regarding the composition of pediatric healthcare teams and how they work with children, (3) children\'s perspectives on what constitutes good interactions with healthcare providers are replicated, (4) minimal references to theory or philosophical underpinnings that can guide practice.
CONCLUSIONS: Explicit references to children\'s participation rights are lacking in the literature which may reflect the absence of rights language that could inform pediatric practice. Descriptive understandings of the tenets of pediatric interprofessional team composition and collaboration are necessary if we are to imagine the child as part of the team along with their family. Despite these shortcomings, the literature alludes to children\'s ability to discern desirable interactions with healthcare providers.

The number of low back pain (LBP) cases is projected to increase to more than 800 million by 2050. To address the substantial burden of disease associated with this rise in prevalence, effective treatments are needed. While clinical practice guidelines (CPG) consistently recommend non-pharmacological therapies as first-line treatments, recommendations regarding manual therapy (MT) in treating low back pain vary. The goal of this narrative review was to critically summarize the available evidence for MT behind these recommendations, to scrutinize its mechanisms of action, and propose some actionable steps for clinicians on how this knowledge can be integrated into a person-centered approach. Despite disparate recommendations from CPG, MT is as effective as other available treatments and may be offered to patients with LBP, especially as part of a treatment package with exercise and education. Most of the effects of MT are not specific to the technique. MT and other interventions share several mechanisms of action that mediate treatment success. These mechanisms can encompass patients\' expectations, prior experiences, beliefs and convictions, epistemic trust, and nonspecific contextual effects. Although MT is safer than opioids for patients with LBP, this alone is insufficient. Our goal is to encourage clinicians to shift away from outdated and refuted ideas in MT and embrace a person-centered approach rooted in a comprehensive biopsychosocial framework while incorporating patients\' beliefs, addressing illness behaviors, and seeking to understand each patient\'s journey.

Parental responses to young people\'s coming out as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB) are a crucial experience in identity formation and subsequent mental health outcomes. However, how parents react to coming out varies and remains relatively imprecise in the literature. The aim of the present critical review was to explore and discuss the different definitions and measurement tools used in studies assessing perceived parental reactions to the coming out of LGB people aged 18 years and over. Following PRISMA guidelines, a review of 14 selected articles was carried out to examine the different tools used. Then, based on this selection of articles, a review of the different proposed definitions of parental reactions was carried out. Analysis revealed that the Perceived Parental Reactions Scale emerged as the most widely used and most appropriate international scale for capturing the diversity of perceived parental reactions. Then, parental responses were often addressed in a dichotomous manner, focusing primarily on acceptance or rejection. Future studies will need to consider a more nuanced approach to understanding parental reactions to coming out.

UNASSIGNED: Improving hospitalised patients\' psychological well-being (PWB) is relevant to their recovery and overall quality of life. Virtual Reality (VR) holds the potential to emerge as a novel tool for increasing the PWB of hospitalised patients. This study critically reviewed existing research concerning the use and impact of VR on the PWB of hospitalised patients with serious illnesses. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and practical applicability of VR in enhancing the PWB for hospitalised patients dealing with serious illnesses.
UNASSIGNED: In the initial search, the authors identified 106 sources that provided valuable insights into the broader field of VR, PWB, and the influence of VR on the psychological functioning of hospitalised patients. However, only eight articles were selected for the critical review, following the SALSA method. The SALSA method comprises the following steps: (S) Search, (AL) Appraisal, (S) Synthesis and (A) Analysis. Data extracted from these eight articles were subjected to reflexive thematic analysis, through which patterns were identified to examine the use and impact of VR on the PWB of hospitalised patients with serious illnesses. The thematic analysis process involves data gathering and familiarisation, code identification, and formulating and refining various themes to produce a thematic analysis report.
UNASSIGNED: The themes that emerged from the analysis were (i) positive psychological effects (with sub-themes including the effectiveness of VR in improving psychological symptoms, its role as an equivalent or adjunctive treatment, and symptom reduction), (ii) perceptions and the adoption of novel technology, (iii) characteristics that influence the effectiveness of VR, and (iv) statistical and practical applicability and diversity of VR.
UNASSIGNED: The use of VR to increase the PWB of hospitalised patients is a relatively recent innovation. Nevertheless, the themes identified in this study indicate that the use of VR within the context of hospitalised patients can benefit their psychological functioning, ultimately contributing to an improvement in their overall PWB. Further in-depth studies are needed to provide a comprehensive conclusion on the potential benefits of VR on the PWB of hospitalised patients dealing with serious illnesses.