Published in the esteemed British Journal of Dermatology, this experimental study represents a significant leap forward in evidence-based dermatology. Initiated as the “Eczema Bathing Study,” the research was uniquely co-designed with active involvement from individuals living with eczema, marrying patient insight with rigorous clinical methodology. This participatory research model underscores an evolving trend in medical science that prioritizes patient engagement to enhance relevance and applicability of findings.

The study meticulously compared two distinctly common bathing regimens: daily bathing, involving six or more showers or baths per week, and weekly bathing, defined by just one or two episodes weekly. The randomized controlled design ensured equitable distribution of participants into either group, thereby minimizing confounders and providing robust comparative data. Researchers monitored a substantial cohort of 438 individuals across the UK, encompassing both pediatric and adult populations, to capture a comprehensive spectrum of eczema cases.

Over a four-week observational period, all participants continued their routine eczema management therapies while diligently logging symptom severity through standardized dermatological assessments. Statistical analyses conducted demonstrated no statistically significant difference in eczema flare-ups or symptom intensity between the frequently bathed group and those who bathed sporadically. This outcome emphatically suggests that bathing frequency is not a determinant factor in eczema symptomatology.

Dr. Lucy Bradshaw, the study’s lead author and senior medical statistician at the Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, voiced enthusiasm about the implications of the findings. She highlighted how co-creating research with eczema patients helped answer persistent practical questions that have historically lacked solid evidence. This collaborative approach offers a paradigm shift in how patient-centered research can meaningfully influence clinical guidelines, enhancing both patient experience and treatment efficacy.

From a clinical perspective, the findings provide dermatologists and primary care physicians with concrete evidence to inform patient consultations. Given that eczema’s etiology involves complex genetic, immunological, and environmental factors, pinpointing modifiable lifestyle behaviors that influence disease progression is critical. This study effectively absolves bathing frequency from concern, permitting a shift in focus towards more impactful therapeutic interventions such as emollient application and anti-inflammatory treatments.

Amanda Roberts, a co-investigator and eczema patient representative, emphasized the psychological and quality-of-life benefits stemming from this research. Many individuals with eczema experience anxiety over daily life activities due to fear of triggering flare-ups. Knowing that how often one bathes is inconsequential removes a significant psychological burden, potentially alleviating stress-induced exacerbations and improving overall wellbeing.

This investigation is part of the larger Rapid Eczema Trials project, a comprehensive five-year research initiative launched in 2022 aimed at resolving critical, yet under-investigated questions in eczema care. The project utilizes an innovative citizen science model that engages a broad community of eczema patients in designing and conducting research, thereby accelerating knowledge generation that is both relevant and immediately applicable.

Future trials under the Rapid Eczema Trials umbrella are already underway, with forthcoming studies exploring optimal durations for the use of topical steroids during flare-ups—addressing another clinical uncertainty that impacts therapeutic outcomes and patient adherence. The cumulative outputs from this consortium of UK universities, led by the University of Nottingham and Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, promise to reshape eczema management paradigms comprehensively.

Clinicians like Professor Matthew Ridd from the University of Bristol acknowledge the transformative impact of this research. The simplicity of the bathing frequency question belies its importance in daily patient management, making this evidence-based clarity invaluable in clinical settings. It stands as a testament to how rigorously designed practical research can resolve everyday patient dilemmas, fostering better health literacy and informed decision-making.

Institutions like the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) herald this study as a model example of integrating patient involvement into research governance and design to yield meaningful, actionable insights. Professor Marian Knight, Scientific Director for NIHR Infrastructure, underscored the broader significance, noting the role of such studies in enhancing patients’ ability to understand and manage their health with evidence-driven confidence.

Beyond clinical relevance, these findings bear implications for product development in dermatology, influencing guidelines on cleansing agents, bath additives, and moisturizers. The reassurance that bathing frequency does not aggravate eczema may prompt manufacturers and clinicians alike to reconsider recommendations that unduly restrict personal hygiene practices, focusing instead on the quality and formulation of skincare products.

Ultimately, this study represents a milestone in dermatological research, aligning scientific rigor with real-world patient concerns. By dispelling myths surrounding bathing routines, it allows eczema patients to reclaim autonomy over a routine aspect of daily life previously shrouded in uncertainty. This alignment of science, patient collaboration, and clinical application heralds a new era in eczema management grounded in empowerment, precision, and holistic wellbeing.

Subject of Research: People

Article Title: Weekly versus daily bathing for people with eczema: results of the Eczema Bathing online randomised controlled trial

News Publication Date: 10-Nov-2025

Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljaf417

Keywords: Skin, Dermatology

Traditional health AI systems have largely been designed within rigid binary gender models, frequently neglecting the unique physiological and psychosocial needs of transgender and non-binary populations. Such limitations not only restrict the utility of AI-powered healthcare tools for these communities but also risk exacerbating existing health disparities. The recent study delves into these concerns by engaging members of the transgender community directly in its research process, embracing a communicative methodology that emphasizes participatory collaboration rather than top-down analysis. This approach marks an essential shift in biomedical AI research, highlighting the importance of involving marginalized groups to co-create more equitable technologies.

The research was conducted in close partnership with the LGBTQIA+ advocacy group PRISMA, which plays a pivotal role in defending the rights of sexual and gender minorities within scientific and technological innovation spheres. This collaboration ensured that the study remained grounded in real-world experiences and ethical imperatives, avoiding the common pitfall of tokenistic inclusion. Representatives from the Health Care and Promotion Service for Trans and Non-Binary People (TRÀNSIT) at the Catalan Health Institute also provided critical insights, further enriching the study’s contextual relevance and fostering trust between researchers and participants.

At the heart of the study were three telematic focus groups composed of eighteen transgender individuals tasked with articulating their experiences and perspectives concerning current AI applications in healthcare. Participants reported that many existing AI tools propagate the biases of their predominantly cisgender developers. As an illustrative example, certain voice modification applications, designed to assist in gender transition, frequently misclassify users by gender. This misrecognition not only undermines the app’s therapeutic efficacy but also inflicts emotional distress on users by invalidating their gender identity through technology.

Such technological missteps are emblematic of a larger problem: the replication and amplification of societal biases within AI systems. This pernicious feedback loop leads to the invisibilization of transgender people, reinforcing structural inequities. Simón Perera del Rosario, a co-author from UPF, highlighted that this dynamic can have deleterious effects on mental health, self-esteem, and overall quality of life for transgender individuals. These findings emphasize the ethical imperative to design AI systems that are not just functionally effective but also socially responsible.

One of the study’s major recommendations focuses on leveraging AI’s capabilities to enhance the personalization of medical treatments, notably in the administration of masculinizing or feminizing hormonal therapies. Currently, hormone dosages are often standardized according to cisgender parameters, ignoring the distinct physiological profiles within transgender populations. AI systems, equipped with diverse data reflecting individual variations, could optimize dosage regimens and monitor potential interactions with other medications, thus minimizing side effects and maximizing therapeutic outcomes. This precision medicine approach marks a significant advance toward truly individualized care.

Participants also stressed the crucial importance of ethical data management. Their concerns revolve around how personal data related to gender identity is collected, stored, and used within medical systems. The group advocated for strictly limiting the use of such sensitive data to relevant medical contexts, entrusting only qualified health professionals with this information. This precaution is vital to prevent unauthorized misuse and to respect privacy, which has historically been a major barrier for transgender individuals seeking care. Furthermore, participants warned that AI systems built on binary frameworks risk misinterpreting data, thereby leading to diagnostic inaccuracies or inappropriate treatment decisions.

The mistrust of healthcare institutions among many transgender individuals is a significant hurdle that technology alone cannot overcome. This distrust stems from a long history of discrimination and medical pathologization, underscored by the World Health Organization’s delayed removal of “transsexuality” as a mental disorder only in 2019. To rebuild trust, the study underscores the necessity for comprehensive healthcare professional education and sensitization to transgender-specific health needs. Such training initiatives would enhance provider competence and foster more respectful, informed patient interactions, which are essential for effective AI integration in clinical practice.

Expanding the scientific evidence base concerning transgender health and AI is another vital pillar of the study’s agenda. Current research addressing these intersecting domains remains alarmingly sparse. There is an urgent need for more scholarly attention focused on developing AI models that reflect gender diversity holistically, from data collection to algorithmic design and deployment. Encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration among computer scientists, clinicians, and social scientists will be critical to ensuring these models are robust, ethical, and clinically impactful.

Moreover, fostering solidarity networks and knowledge exchange platforms between transgender communities and healthcare professionals holds great promise. These spaces enable the co-creation of AI tools grounded in lived experience, thereby enhancing relevance and acceptance. By engaging stakeholders throughout AI development cycles, the healthcare field can produce technologies that empower rather than alienate marginalized groups.

The study’s communication methodology itself represents an innovative research paradigm that upends conventional investigator-led approaches. By actively involving transgender participants in the research design and oversight, facilitated by PRISMA, the research ensured that ethical standards were meticulously upheld and that outcomes would resonate authentically with the community. This participatory ethic exemplifies a progressive direction for AI research writ large, emphasizing inclusivity, transparency, and reciprocal respect.

In conclusion, the ongoing evolution of AI in healthcare offers unprecedented opportunities to deliver personalized, equitable medical care. However, realizing this potential necessitates deliberate efforts to dismantle ingrained binary biases in AI systems. The interdisciplinary collaboration between UPF, BSC-CNS, URV, and advocacy partners like PRISMA points the way toward constructing AI applications that truly reflect and serve the diverse tapestry of human gender identities. Embracing this vision promises not only to improve health outcomes for transgender individuals but also to enrich the field of AI-powered medicine as a whole with more nuanced, just, and humane technologies.

Subject of Research: People

Article Title: Exploring Gender Bias in AI for Personalized Medicine: Focus Group Study With Trans Community Members

News Publication Date: 29-Jul-2025

Web References:

• Journal of Medical Internet Research DOI link
• PRISMA association
• TRÀNSIT Health Care and Promotion Service

References: None declared.

Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, Personalized medicine, Algorithms, Transgender identity

Burnout is not merely a feeling of exhaustion; it’s a complex phenomenon characterized by emotional fatigue, depersonalization, and a reduced sense of personal achievement. In a profession where empathy and patient care are paramount, the emotional toll can reach astronomical levels. The research conducted by Schiele et al. aims to unpack the various aspects contributing to burnout while providing a comprehensive strategy for mitigating its effects. This endeavor comes at a crucial time when the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the existing challenges faced by healthcare workers.

One of the distinctive features of the LAGOM program is its collaborative approach. The researchers engaged directly with healthcare professionals to understand their experiences and feelings regarding burnout. This participatory method not only fosters a sense of ownership among the staff but also ensures that the interventions are tailored to their unique challenges and requirements. By bridging the gap between theory and practice, the program seeks to create real-world solutions that can be implemented within healthcare settings.

Intervention mapping, the methodological framework employed in designing the LAGOM program, plays a pivotal role in its success. This structured process involves several phases, including needs assessment, program design, implementation planning, and evaluation. By following this systematic approach, the research team can outline specific objectives and tackle the root causes of burnout effectively. Each phase lays the groundwork for the subsequent actions, ensuring that the program is not only evidence-based but also practical and actionable.

During the needs assessment phase, the team gathered qualitative data from healthcare professionals through interviews and focus groups. This data collection was essential for identifying not just the symptoms of burnout but also the underlying factors contributing to it. Working conditions, interpersonal relationships among staff, and the nature of the job itself were some of the critical areas of focus. Insights derived from these discussions were instrumental in shaping the core elements of the LAGOM program.

The design phase synthesized the findings from the needs assessment into practical interventions. By utilizing feedback from healthcare professionals, the researchers could align the program’s components with the realities of their daily experiences. Such an approach ensures that anticipated interventions resonate with the workforce, thereby increasing adoption and adherence rates. The focus was not merely on reducing burnout but also on cultivating resilience, emotional intelligence, and coping strategies to empower healthcare workers.

Implementation in real settings presents its own set of challenges. However, the researchers prioritized a strategic rollout of the program through pilot initiatives in select institutions. These pilot tests enable the research team to observe how the program operates in practice and make necessary adjustments in response to real-world feedback. By adopting a flexible implementation strategy, the LAGOM program can be refined continuously, ensuring that it remains relevant and effective.

Equally important is the evaluation phase, which will assess the program’s impact over time. This step involves both qualitative and quantitative evaluation techniques to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the program’s effectiveness. By measuring outcomes like burnout levels, job satisfaction, and overall mental health, the team can present evidence demonstrating the program’s value to stakeholders, including healthcare administrators and policymakers.

The significance of this study extends beyond immediate burnout prevention. The researchers envision the LAGOM program as a model that can influence broader policy changes within healthcare systems. As burnout becomes increasingly recognized as a public health crisis, programs like LAGOM offer practical frameworks for intervention. By focusing on the holistic well-being of healthcare workers, the initiative contributes to improving patient care and satisfaction, creating a healthier, more sustainable healthcare environment for everyone involved.

The implications of addressing healthcare worker burnout resonate through various levels of the healthcare system. With a significant portion of the workforce feeling the strain of excessive workload and emotional toll, the risk extends to patient safety and quality of care. High burnout rates often correlate with medical errors, decreased patient satisfaction, and higher turnover rates – all detrimental to healthcare outcomes. Therefore, proactive initiatives such as LAGOM are not merely beneficial but essential.

Moreover, adapting a collaborative and participant-driven research approach can revolutionize how interventions are designed across various fields, not just healthcare. The methodology can be replicated in other high-stress environments where burnout is prevalent, such as education, social work, and emergency services. This versatility of the research underscores a shift towards more inclusive strategies and solutions that recognize the value of worker input in creating effective organizational interventions.

As healthcare continues to evolve, the importance of addressing the psychological well-being of healthcare professionals cannot be overstated. The innovative approaches laid out in the LAGOM program provide a stepping stone toward developing a culture that prioritizes mental health in the workplace. By embracing the insights from this study, the healthcare industry can spearhead transformative initiatives to create an atmosphere where professionals feel supported and valued.

In conclusion, the study by Schiele and colleagues marks a significant advancement in the battle against burnout in the healthcare sector. Through collaborative intervention mapping, the LAGOM program demonstrates a promising pathway to enhance the resilience of healthcare workers. As these interventions gain traction, the potential for improved mental health outcomes and patient care becomes increasingly attainable. By recognizing and addressing the multifaceted nature of burnout, the healthcare community can take substantial strides towards nurturing a healthier workforce and, by extension, a healthier society.

Subject of Research: Burnout prevention among healthcare professionals.

Article Title: Designing the LAGOM burnout prevention program: a collaborative approach with healthcare professionals using intervention mapping.

Article References:

Schiele, J.K., Schröter, M., Berschick, J. et al. Designing the LAGOM burnout prevention program: a collaborative approach with healthcare professionals using intervention mapping.
BMC Med Educ 25, 1254 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07943-9

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-025-07943-9

Keywords: Burnout, healthcare professionals, intervention mapping, LAGOM program, mental health, collaborative approach, healthcare system.

At the heart of this advancement lies a robust scientific inquiry designed to evaluate the PAM-MH rigorously, addressing a critical gap in mental health outcome measurement. Patient activation plays a pivotal role in shaping treatment adherence, symptom monitoring, and recovery trajectories. However, capturing this dynamic construct demands tools that not only resonate meaningfully with patients but also withstand empirical scrutiny across cultural and clinical contexts. The Norwegian study employs a multi-phased, participatory methodology, emphasizing collaboration with actual patients to safeguard the measure’s real-world applicability and relevance.

In the initial phase, user representatives from outpatient mental health services were engaged directly to assess the face validity of the PAM-MH. Face validity pertains to whether the measure appears to be an appropriate instrument from the perspective of its intended users, assessed through qualitative and quantitative feedback. The participants evaluated the perceived “value” and “burden” of completing the questionnaire, with results indicating an acceptable balance; the mean value score approached 60%, while the perceived burden lingered below 40%. This insight reveals that patients find the PAM-MH both worthwhile and manageable, a crucial prerequisite for adherence in routine clinical practice.

The second phase delved into construct validity, a more technical pursuit involving statistical correlations that ascertain whether the tool indeed measures the theoretical concept it claims to capture. Using a cohort of 55 Norwegian outpatients, researchers compared scores on the PAM-MH against the original PAM-13, widely considered the gold standard for patient activation measurement. The expected strong positive correlation was confirmed through Pearson’s r correlations, bolstering confidence that PAM-MH effectively operationalizes patient activation in the mental health domain. These findings cement the scale’s conceptual integrity, extending its relevance into a new cultural and clinical arena.

Subsequent analyses centered on reliability, examining both the consistency of scores over time (test–retest reliability) and internal coherence across scale items (internal consistency). Conducted with 27 participants, the test–retest assessment quantified stability via the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), a rigorous statistical approach for repeat agreements. Concurrently, Cronbach’s alpha served to validate internal consistency, ensuring the components of the measure work cohesively. Both indices presented compelling evidence that the PAM-MH delivers stable, repeatable, and internally harmonized results. Such psychometric robustness enhances the measure’s utility for longitudinal monitoring and clinical decision-making.

The final, and perhaps most clinically vital, phase evaluated the PAM-MH’s responsiveness—the ability to detect meaningful changes over time, such as improvements following therapeutic intervention. Employing rigorous predefined hypotheses in a small but focused cohort of 11 outpatients, the measure demonstrated sensitivity to change, reflecting fluctuations in patient activation as their mental health journey progressed. Responsiveness is paramount in outcome measures, ensuring tools are not merely static evaluations but dynamic instruments capable of capturing progress or setbacks in real time.

Crucially, the study’s participatory design marks an innovative dimension in mental health research. Involving user representatives at multiple validation stages transcends traditional top-down metric development, fostering instruments better aligned with patient experiences and intrinsic values. This collaborative ethos may facilitate greater engagement and trust from patients, addressing historical challenges in mental health assessment where perceived irrelevance or complexity often undermines effective measurement.

While the PAM-MH was originally crafted in the United States, the Norwegian validation introduces culturally specific considerations, including language nuances, health care structures, and patient expectations. The successful translation and psychometric evaluation signify that the scale’s foundational principles hold across diverse populations, reinforcing its potential as a universal metric for patient activation in mental health care settings internationally. This breakthrough opens avenues for cross-national comparative studies and harmonized patient-centered approaches.

The implications of deploying a validated, reliable, and responsive patient activation measure extend beyond academic interest. Clinicians, service planners, and policymakers can harness the PAM-MH as a practical tool to tailor interventions, monitor patient engagement, and ultimately enhance therapeutic outcomes. By quantifying activation, providers gain actionable insights, potentially refining treatment plans, prioritizing resource allocation, and identifying patients at risk of disengagement or deterioration.

Moreover, the PAM-MH addresses a vital gap in mental health research which often lags in standardized outcome measurement compared to physical health domains. Activation reflects an individual’s active involvement in self-management—a cornerstone of recovery-oriented models that emphasize empowerment rather than passive care. Objective measurement of this attribute enables shifts toward more personalized and responsive health systems where patient perspectives shape care trajectories.

Despite its strengths, the study acknowledges limitations, particularly the modest sample sizes used in reliability and responsiveness analyses. Larger, more diverse cohorts are needed to further validate findings and explore sensitivity across diagnostic categories, illness severities, and treatment modalities. Future research could also examine longitudinal trajectories of activation and its predictive value for clinical outcomes, service utilization, or quality of life metrics over extended periods.

Nevertheless, this Norwegian multi-phase study sets a new benchmark in mental health psychometrics by demonstrating that the PAM-MH is both scientifically sound and practically feasible. Its confirmed face validity ensures patient acceptability, while construct validity aligns it theoretically with existing measures. High reliability indices guarantee consistent results, and responsiveness confirms its clinical relevance for monitoring change. Together, these attributes affirm the scale’s readiness for wider adoption in outpatient mental health care.

As mental health services worldwide pivot toward models centered around patient empowerment and shared decision-making, tools like the PAM-MH become indispensable. Their use supports a paradigm where patients are recognized as active agents in their recovery, fostering engagement that transcends symptom reduction to encompass holistic well-being. This evolution in measurement science not only advances clinical practice but also embodies a deeper respect for individuals navigating the complexities of mental health.

In summary, the validation of the PAM-MH in a Norwegian outpatient setting represents a significant step forward in the quantification of patient activation within mental health care. By combining methodological rigor, patient involvement, and cross-cultural adaptation, the study illuminates a promising path toward reliable, valid, and responsive measurement. Such instruments are crucial as mental health professionals seek to integrate patient-centered metrics into both research and routine care, ultimately enhancing outcomes and quality of life for millions worldwide.

Subject of Research: Validation of the Patient Activation Measure–Mental Health (PAM-MH) scale assessing face validity, construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness in a Norwegian outpatient mental health setting.

Article Title: The mental-health patient-activation measure: assessing validity, reliability, and responsiveness in outpatient settings

Article References:
Skliarova, T., Lara-Cabrera, M.L., Brobakken, M.F. et al. The mental-health patient-activation measure: assessing validity, reliability, and responsiveness in outpatient settings. BMC Psychiatry 25, 520 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06939-5

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-025-06939-5