The absence of proper recruitment or insufficient presence of older patients in clinical development plans for new medicinal products is detrimental; there is a need to improve evidence-based knowledge, understanding and management of their conditions and treatment. The aim of this guidance is to facilitate clinical research for and with the older patient population. The long version of the guidance will be available on the EFGCP's website: www.efgcp.be/.

Purpose Despite the increasing incidence of currently incurable brain cancer, limited resources are placed in patients’ support systems, with reactive utilisation late in the disease course, when physical and psychological symptoms have peaked. Based on patient-derived data and emphasis on service improvement, this review investigated the structure and efficacy of the support methods of newly diagnosed brain cancer patients in healthcare systems. Methods This systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Articles from PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were screened with six pre-established eligibility criteria, including assessment within 6 months from diagnosis of a primary malignant brain tumour. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) Qualitative Studies Checklist. Results Of 5057 original articles, 14 were eligible for qualitative synthesis. Four studies were cross-sectional and ten were descriptive. Information given to patients was evaluated in seven studies, communication with patients in nine, and patient participation in treatment decisions in eight. Risk of bias was low in ten studies, moderate in two, and high in two. Conclusions Techniques promoting individualised care increased perceived support, despite poor patient-physician communication and complexity of the healthcare system. Extracted data across 14 included studies informed a set of guidelines and a four-step framework. These can help evaluate and reform healthcare services to better accommodate the supportive needs of this patient group.

To evaluate the status of UK undergraduate urology teaching against the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Undergraduate Syllabus for Urology. Secondary objectives included evaluating the type and quantity of teaching provided, the reported performance rate of General Medical Council (GMC)-mandated urological procedures, and the proportion of undergraduates considering urology as a career. Subjects and MethodsThe uroLogical tEAching in bRitish medical schools Nationally (LEARN) study was a national multicentre cross-sectional evaluation. Year 2 to Year 5 medical students and Foundation Year (FY) 1 doctors were invited to complete a survey between 3 October and 20 December 2020, retrospectively assessing the urology teaching received to date. Results are reported according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). ResultsIn all, 7063/8346 (84.6%) responses from all 39 UK medical schools were included; 1127/7063 (16.0%) were from FY1 doctors who reported that the most frequently taught topics in undergraduate training were on urinary tract infection (96.5%), acute kidney injury (95.9%) and haematuria (94.4%). The most infrequently taught topics were male urinary incontinence (59.4%), male infertility (52.4%) and erectile dysfunction (43.8%). Male and female catheterisation on patients as undergraduates was performed by 92.1% and 73.0% of FY1 doctors respectively, and 16.9% had considered a career in urology. Theory-based teaching was mainly prevalent in the early years of medical school, with clinical skills teaching, and

The coronavirus 2019 (SARS-Cov-2) pandemic has proven to be a disaster in need of controlling. The disease has taken its toll on universities; as a consequence, universities must prepare their campuses in such a way that will reduce SARS-Cov-2 cases and ensure the safety of their students. This is why it is necessary to critically assess the risks involved in reopening university campuses. This letter to the editor highlights the importance of the social side of student life on campus, and how it might affect the precautions put in place to reduce SARS-Cov-2 transmission. Furthermore, this letter is proposing potential courses of action for universities to take during the pandemic, this forthcoming academic year. The ability of universities to contain the spread of the virus is limited, as they lack control over social interactions outside of campus. We discuss the multifaceted approach needed to educate students about off-campus transmission allowing the prevention of SARS-Cov-2 transmission.

No abstract