INTRODUCTION International standards of care require the complete integration of psycho-oncological care into biomedical cancer treatment. The structured integrated, cross-sectoral psycho-oncological programme 'isPO' is aiming to ensure a provision of care in inpatient and outpatient settings according to a stepped-care approach. Up to now, psycho-oncological care is missing regulated and standardised processes to demonstrate the effectiveness. This study protocol describes the process and outcome evaluation that is conducted, along with the isPO study. The programme evaluation is aiming to proof effectiveness, explain potential discrepancies between expected and observed outcomes. Additionally, provide insight into the implementation process, as well as contextual factors that might promote or inhibit the dissemination and implementation of the stepped care programme will be gained. In addition to these measures, a cost-consequence analysis will provide further evidence aimed at integrating psycho-oncologicabe pseudonymised. Dissemination strategies include annual reports as well as quality workshops for the organisations, the presentation of results in publications and on conferences, and public relations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER DRKS00015326; Pre-results. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.OBJECTIVE To understand the beliefs that primary care practitioners (PCPs) and patients with overweight and obesity have about obesity and primary care weight management in Scotland. SETTING Seven National Health Service (NHS) Scotland primary care centres. PARTICIPANTS A total of 305 patients and 14 PCPs (12 general practitioners; two practice nurses) participated. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY A cross-sectional mixed-methods study. PCPs and patients completed questionnaires assessing beliefs about obesity and primary care weight communication and management. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with PCPs to elaborate on questionnaire topics. Quantitative and qualitative data were synthesised to address study objectives. RESULTS (1) Many patients with overweight and obesity did not accurately perceive their weight or risk of developing weight-related health issues; (2) PCPs and patients reported behavioural factors as the most important cause of obesity, and medical factors as the most important consequence; (3) PCPs perceive their role in weight management as awareness raising and signposting, not prevention or weight monitoring; (4) PCPs identify structural and patient-related factors as barriers to weight communication and management, but not PCP factors. CONCLUSIONS Incongruent and/or inaccurate beliefs held by PCPs and patient may present barriers to effective weight discussion and management in primary care. There is a need to review, standardise and clarify primary care weight management processes in Scotland. Acknowledging a shared responsibility for obesity as a disease may improve outcomes for patients with overweight and obesity. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.INTRODUCTION More women experience cardiac pain related to coronary artery disease and cardiac procedures compared with men. The overall goal of this programme of research is to develop an integrated smartphone and web-based intervention (HEARTPA♀N) to help women recognise and self-manage cardiac pain. selleckchem METHODS AND ANALYSIS This protocol outlines the mixed methods strategy used for the development of the HEARTPA♀N content/core feature set (phase 2A), usability testing (phase 2B) and evaluation with a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) (phase 3). We are using the individual and family self-management theory, mobile device functionality and pervasive information architecture of mHealth interventions, and following a sequential phased approach recommended by the Medical Research Council to develop HEARTPA♀N. The phase 3 pilot RCT will enable us to refine the prototype, inform the methodology and calculate the sample size for a larger multisite RCT (phase 4, future work). Patient partners have been actively iets and webinars. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03800082. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.INTRODUCTION Iodinated contrast media are commonly used in medical imaging and can cause hypersensitivity reactions, including rare but severe life-threatening reactions. Although several prophylactic approaches have been proposed for severe reactions, their effects remain unclear. Therefore, we aim to review systematically the preventive effects of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions and predictors of acute, hypersensitivity reactions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will search the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 1 January 1990 through 31 December 2019 and will examine the bibliographies of eligible studies, pertinent review articles and clinical practice guidelines. We will include prospective and retrospective studies of any design that evaluated the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological preventive interventions for adverse reactions of non-ionic iodinated contrast media. Two assessors will independently extract the characteristics of theuse permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.OBJECTIVES To compare the loss of working time due to sick leave by treatment strategy for localised prostate cancer. DESIGN Nationwide cohort study. SETTING Sweden. PARTICIPANTS A total of 15 902 working-aged men with localised low or intermediate-risk prostate cancer diagnosed during 2007-2016 from the Prostate Cancer Data Base Sweden, together with 63 464 prostate cancer-free men. Men were followed until 2016. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES Using multistate Markov models, we calculated the proportion of men on work, sick leave, disability pension and death, together with the amount of time spent in each state. All-cause and cause-specific estimates were calculated. RESULTS During the first 5 years after diagnosis, men with active surveillance as their primary treatment strategy spent a mean of 17 days (95% CI 15 to 19) on prostate cancer-specific sick leave, as compared with 46 days (95% CI 44 to 48) after radical prostatectomy and 44 days (95% CI 38 to 50) after radiotherapy. The pattern was similar after adjustment for cancer and sociodemographic characteristics.