Adverse childhood experiences are critical contributors to the development of psychiatric disorders. Despite its pervasive impact on mental health, childhood neglect remains underexplored. Here, we performed a first comprehensive synthesis of the association between neglect subtypes and psychiatric disorders.

The primary aim was to quantify the overall association between neglect and psychiatric disorders, by estimating the odds ratios from clinical and control groups. The secondary aim was to examine the association between unspecified, physical and emotional neglect, and specific psychiatric disorders.

Studies were systematically selected from three databases (PubMed, EMBASE and PsycINFO), focusing on adult populations with diagnosed psychiatric disorders and corresponding control groups. Meta-analyses assessed overall associations between neglect and psychiatric disorders, as well as subtypes-specific associations with distinct psychiatric conditions. Multiple meta-regressions were performed to explore moderating factors.

Strong associations were found between neglect and psychiatric disorders across all subtypes (unspecified neglect: odds ratio 3.63, 95% CI 2.19–6.01; physical neglect: odds ratio 3.27, 95% CI 2.51–4.25; emotional neglect: odds ratio 3.36, 95% CI 2.58–4.38). Subgroup analyses showed the strongest associations between unspecified neglect and bipolar disorder, physical neglect and schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and emotional neglect and major depressive disorder. Other associations emerged, although their interpretation was limited by a small number of studies and high heterogeneity levels.

Neglect is significantly associated with psychiatric disorders, with distinct patterns across neglect subtypes and mental health outcomes. These findings highlight the need for early identification and tailored interventions to mitigate neglect’s long-term burden on mental health.

Dementia affects approximately 6–13% of adults aged 65 years and older, with Alzheimer’s disease accounting for most cases. Established symptomatic therapies, including acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine, provide limited benefit and do not modify disease progression. Multiple monoclonal antibodies (mABs) targeting different amyloid-β species have been developed as potential disease-modifying therapies; because some agents have entered clinical use whereas others remain investigational, a continuously updated synthesis of their efficacy and safety is needed.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of all anti-amyloid mABs for adults with Alzheimer’s disease, using a living systematic review and meta-analysis.

We will conduct a living systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and the PRISMA extension for living systematic reviews. Randomised controlled trials comparing any approved or investigational anti-amyloid mAB with placebo, standard care or active comparators will be included. Searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform will be updated every 6 months. Meta-analyses will be conducted separately for each antibody molecule using random-effects models. Critical outcomes include global clinical change and disease severity, cognitive abilities, functional ability and dependency, and safety (serious adverse events, treatment discontinuation and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities). Important outcomes include neuropsychiatric symptoms, quality of life and health system outcomes. Certainty of evidence will be assessed using the methodology Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

This article describes a protocol; therefore, no review findings are available at this stage.

This living systematic review will provide an up-to-date synthesis of the benefits and harms of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies to inform clinical decision-making and health-system planning in Alzheimer’s disease.

Up to 60 per cent of patients with enlarged vestibular aqueduct syndrome experience sudden hearing loss. This review analyses treatment options and outcomes when sudden hearing loss occurs.

Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science databases were the data sources. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered on PROSPERO. The number of patients, episodes, treatments, baseline hearing and change in hearing thresholds after intervention and return to baseline were extracted.

The final analysis included 60 episodes of hearing loss from 11 studies, from a search of 1,064 studies. The treatment groups were: 1, no treatment; 2, systemic steroids; 3, salvage hyperbaric oxygen therapy in steroid partial or non-responders. The hearing improvement across the groups was 9.1 per cent, 50 per cent and 89.5 per cent, respectively.

Enlarged vestibular aqueduct patients with sudden hearing loss may first be treated with systemic steroids. Salvage hyperbaric oxygen therapy can be considered in steroid non-responders to improve further chances of recovery.

As rheumatoid arthritis of the cricoarytenoid joint can be life-threatening, this study aimed to provide a comparison of survival and decannulation after tracheostomy for those with this condition.

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (‘PRISMA’) guidelines, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase and MEDLINE library databases were queried to find all reported cases of rheumatoid arthritis of the cricoarytenoid joint.

A total of 55 articles with 82 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age at diagnosis was 60.1 ± 11.2 years. In cases of bilateral involvement, 71.2 per cent of patients required a tracheostomy. For those who had bilateral cricoarytenoid joint involvement and a tracheostomy, there was a significant relationship between having a primary laryngeal surgery, with or without medical management, and overall survival with ultimate decannulation compared with those with just medical management (p = 0.0022).

Tracheostomy is often necessary for acute symptom management of rheumatoid arthritis of the cricoarytenoid joint, and laryngeal surgery may be offered to facilitate ultimate decannulation.

People with intellectual disabilities experience higher rates of mental disorders, contributing to restrictive practices and premature mortality. Prevalence data are essential to understanding the patterns of disease, and for the development of tailored interventions.

To systematically examine the burden and pattern of mental disorders in people with intellectual disabilities across the lifespan.

We searched six databases (inception to 17 October 2024), and conducted a manual search up to 15 December 2024, for systematic reviews on the prevalence of mental disorders in people with intellectual disabilities with or without neurodevelopmental conditions. We conducted a narrative synthesis of prevalence rates, including those stratified by intellectual disability level, sex, age and autism, where available, and compared these with published prevalence rates in people without intellectual disabilities (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, no. CRD42024610611).

We included 26 systematic reviews: 7 meta-analyses and 19 narrative reviews. Compared with the general population, the prevalence of schizophrenia (3.55–4.80%), anxiety (5.4–5.5%) and obsessive–compulsive disorders (2.4%) appeared higher, whereas that of mood (6–7%), personality and post-traumatic stress disorders appeared lower. Study quality was moderate to critically low. For syndromic intellectual disabilities we noted high anxiety rates in fragile-X, Williams and 22q11.2 deletion syndromes, and in those with co-occurring autism. We found gaps on dementia, bipolar, substance use and eating disorders, and limited data stratified by intellectual disability level, sex and age.

This umbrella review confirms the high prevalence of mental disorders among people with intellectual disabilities, and highlights limited evidence for several conditions and population subgroups, including for minoritised ethnic groups. Standardised, high-quality epidemiological research is needed to shape clinical care and public mental health policy.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of stellate ganglion block for persistent and refractory sensorineural olfactory dysfunction.

A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library was conducted for studies published before December 2025. Eligible studies assessed subjective and/or objective olfactory outcomes before and after stellate ganglion block and, when available, compared stellate ganglion block with placebo or no treatment.

Nine studies involving 441 participants were included. Stellate ganglion block was associated with greater improvements in olfactory composite, identification and subjective scores than controls, but between-group differences were not statistically significant. Subjective and objective improvement rates following stellate ganglion block were 68.9 and 63.4 per cent, respectively. No major adverse events were reported.

Stellate ganglion block appears safe and may provide modest olfactory improvement, but its superiority over control treatments remains unproven, warranting further randomised controlled trials.

People with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSDs) experience high rates of obesity and metabolic dysfunction, contributing substantially to excess morbidity and mortality. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) such as semaglutide and tirzepatide have demonstrated substantial efficacy for weight and glycaemic outcomes in the general population, but evidence in people with SSDs remains limited.

To synthesise all placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining semaglutide and/or tirzepatide in people with SSDs.

A preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs examining the efficacy and safety of semaglutide and/or tirzepatide in adults with SSDs was conducted. Outcomes and adverse events were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

Three trials (n = 258) met inclusion criteria, examining semaglutide dosages of 1.0–2.0 mg over 26–36 weeks. No trials examining tirzepatide were found. Semaglutide significantly reduced body weight (−11.32 kg; 95% CI −15.35 to −7.29), body mass index (−3.58 kg/m2; 95% CI −4.86 to −2.30), haemoglobin A1c (−0.37%; 95% CI −0.51 to −0.22) and fasting glucose (−0.54 mmol/L; 95% CI −0.94 to −0.13). In adverse event analyses, semaglutide was associated with increased risks of abdominal pain (risk ratio 2.93; 95% CI 1.13–7.60), vomiting (risk ratio 2.57; 95% CI 1.39–4.77) and constipation (risk ratio 3.23; 95% CI 1.14–9.18). There was no evidence of increased risk of serious adverse events.

Semaglutide produces clinically meaningful improvements in weight and glycaemic outcomes in people with SSDs, with an adverse event profile consistent with known gastrointestinal effects of GLP-1 RAs in the general population. These findings support semaglutide as a promising adjunctive metabolic intervention in this population, although larger and longer trials, specifically those testing tirzepatide, are needed to better characterise heterogeneity of effects and long-term safety of these promising pharmacological treatments.

Care for bipolar spectrum disorders is often delayed, and these delays are associated with a poorer prognosis. However, little is known about the specific factors that contribute to these delays. Bipolar disorder onset peaks in adolescents and young adults, where barriers to care may be distinct from younger or older populations.

To identify the available evidence on factors contributing to delays in care for adolescents and young adults with bipolar disorder.

We performed a pre-registered systematic search of the literature on delays in the care of 13- to 24-year olds diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Our search yielded n = 5991 unique articles published between 2000 and 2025. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full texts for eligibility according to a priori inclusion criteria. Findings from included studies (n = 27) were summarised in a narrative synthesis, organised according to patient, disease and systemic factors within the Model of Pathways to Treatment.

Findings were limited to observational levels of evidence. There was a relative paucity of research in the appraisal and help-seeking intervals. Some factors in delays to care were consistently identified across multiple studies. However, there were also contradictions or a lack of replication around identified factors.

Research in this area has been declining in the past decade despite contradictory findings and ongoing significant delays in bipolar disorder care. Factors contributing to delays in bipolar disorder care can be effectively organised according to appraisal, help-seeking, diagnostic and pre-treatment intervals. This enables a systematic approach to identifying areas in need of quality improvement and further research.

Hospital surge capacity is pivotal for disaster response, yet the effectiveness of assessment and planning tools remains underexplored.

This systematic review evaluates the reliability, validity, and applicability of surge capacity tools across disaster scenarios.

Following PRISMA guidelines, we analyzed 24 Q1 studies (PubMed, Scopus) using the PICO framework. Risk of bias was assessed via ROBINS-E, and meta-analysis (random-effects model) quantified pooled effect sizes (ES). Subgroup analyses compared simulation tools, surveys, and resource strategies.

The combined ES was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.67–0.82), indicating moderate improvement in preparedness. Simulation tools (Group A) showed the highest consistency (ES = 0.81, I2 = 0%), while resource strategies (Group C) had wider variability (ES = 0.71, I2 = 74.42%). Egger’s regression revealed publication bias (P = 0.004), and heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 76.70%).

Simulation-based tools are most effective for surge capacity, whereas resource strategies require contextual adaptation. Policymakers should prioritize standardized benchmarks and DSS integration, with future research addressing equity and real-world implementation gaps.

Youth in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) bear a disproportionate burden of mental health conditions, alongside low health-seeking behaviours and limited access to services. These gaps underscore the need for accessible strategies such as youth peer-based mental health programmes and supports (Y-PBMHPS).

To examine whether Y-PBMHPS can help address the mental health needs of LMIC youth.

We conducted a rapid review of peer-reviewed literature, searching Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CAB Global Health, Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index for studies of Y-PBMHPS in LMICs published in English between 1 January 2002 and 19 September 2025. Two review authors performed title/abstract screening and full-text review. Study quality was assessed by one review author using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. The primary outcome was change in mental health status, expressed in standardised difference units.

Of 6105 unique records identified, 329 studies were reviewed in full and 34 were included. All studies were conducted in Asia or Africa; 17 were quantitative studies (including randomised controlled trials), 9 were qualitative studies and 8 used quantitative designs with qualitative findings. Y-PBMHPS included counselling, psychotherapy, psychoeducation and self-help groups, with peers acting as leaders, facilitators, educators or service providers. Quantitative studies most frequently assessed anxiety and depression, reporting negligible to moderate effects. Qualitative findings indicated good fidelity, adherence and acceptability, alongside some feasibility challenges.

Y-PBMHPS can broaden youth mental health support and services in LMICs. Clearer guidelines on peer selection, training and supervision and further research in other LMICs, including cost-effectiveness evaluations, would strengthen the evidence base.