Abstract Background Interventions that use nature contact to promote health and well-being exist at the societal/infrastructural level (incl. nature-based solutions) and the individual/group level (incl. nature-based therapies). One way nature-based therapies promote health is by fostering resilience to manage stressors. Nature-based biopsychosocial resilience theory (NBRT) provides a framework to explain how nature plays a role in how resilience-related adaptive resources are built and maintained but this has yet to be tested. Methods The current paper outlines a four-year multi-country (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the UK) research programme that tests the NBRT framework and explores how nature-based therapies can build and maintain individual and community resilience. As well as reviewing and mapping existing interventions globally, nine case studies across Europe are exploring how nature promotes resilience across: (1) whole populations (three case studies); (2) individuals at-risk of metabolic syndrome (three case studies); and (3) individuals with existing issues such as chronic stress, mobility challenges, or cognitive impairments (three case studies). Three case studies use longitudinal cohorts, five use randomised controlled trials, and one a practitioner shared-experience approach. The determinants and impacts of nature-based therapies are also considered beyond effects on individual participants, by assessing distributional issues (e.g., health equity), environmental impacts, financial implications, broader societal acceptability and engagement, as well as the barriers and enablers to successful implementation. In three specific case studies (Barcelona, Padua and Salzburg), this is done through multi-sectoral social innovation actions we refer to as ‘Resilience Hubs’. Results will be summarised in academic publications, a series of sector-specific guides, and an overall ‘What works’ guide for practitioners, policy makers, and the public. Discussion We use a novel theoretical framework to structure a research and innovation programme to inform the implementation of nature-based therapies across Europe and globally. Challenges include the integration of terminology and research practices from multiple disciplinary perspectives, participant recruitment and attrition, especially among marginalised groups, a potential lack of local stakeholder time and interest, potentially small effect sizes of time-limited interventions, and difficulties in identifying distinct causal mechanisms. Mitigation strategies are discussed. Trial registration Of nine case studies (CSs), five are intervention trials and have been registered: a) CS4 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74582097 (22.07.2024); b) CS5 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN14169596 (10.06.2024); c) CS6 clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06622629 (30.09.2024); d) CS7 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN93192592 (29.05.2024); e) CS8 clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06205940 (15.05.2024). All nine case studies have received ethical approval (see Declarations section).
Viral infections, particularly those triggered by emerging pathogens like severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, are increasingly recognized for their profound impact on the gut microbiota, causing dysbiosis, a condition characterized by an imbalance in microbial communities. Recent studies suggest that alterations in gut microbiota can influence disease progression, immune responses, and clinical outcomes. The bidirectional relationship between the gut microbiota and the host immune system is crucial in shaping responses to infection. Furthermore, dysbiosis has been linked to exacerbated inflammation, impaired mucosal barrier function, and altered drug metabolism, thereby complicating both disease pathogenesis and treatment efficacy. This review examines the interplay between viral infections and gut microbiota dysbiosis, with a focus on the underlying mechanisms and potential therapeutic strategies to modulate host immunity. We also evaluate the potential of microbiome-based interventions, such as probiotics, prebiotics, and fecal microbiota transplantation, as therapeutic strategies for restoring microbial balance and mitigating the severity of infections. The paper underscores the need for further research to optimize microbiota-targeted therapies and integrate them into clinical practice, offering a comprehensive approach to managing dysbiosis in viral infectious diseases.
Mucuna pruriens (L.) DC. (Fabaceae), commonly known as velvet bean, is an annual tropical legume widely distributed in India, Africa, and the Americas. It has a long history of use in traditional medicine for managing various health conditions. It is renowned for its anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, aphrodisiac, and anti-Parkinson effects. The entire plant is considered health-promoting, particularly the seeds. They have been used for their neuroprotective, fertility-enhancing, and antioxidant effects. This review aims to compile all available information regarding the chemical composition of all parts of this medicinal plant. For this purpose, the complete databases of Google Scholar, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science available to date were utilized. All studies reported the presence of a diverse range of secondary metabolites, including phenolic compounds, such as phenolic acids, flavonoids, and tannins, as well as saponins and alkaloids. Most studies concentrated on the chemical characterization of the seeds, whereas the leaves, roots, and pods have received comparatively limited scientific attention. The seeds of M. pruriens are renowned for their high concentration of L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA), a metabolic precursor of dopamine. A large proportion of these studies originated from countries where M. pruriens naturally occurs. Few studies have been conducted on the chemical composition of velvet bean outside these regions. Despite the existing information on the chemical composition of M. pruriens. (seeds, leaves, and roots), further research beyond its natural habitat is required to gain a broader understanding of its chemical profile and pharmacological effects.
PURPOSE:The purpose of this systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis was to compare short-term functional outcomes, pain relief, and complication rates between open and endoscopic gluteal tendon repair, expressed as functional improvement normalized to minimal clinically important difference (MCID) units. The hypothesis was that endoscopic repair would provide comparable clinical efficacy with a lower complication rate compared with open repair. METHODS:PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and Epistemonikos were searched to 15 October 2025. Eligible primary studies reporting postoperative or change outcomes were synthesized with a frequentist multilevel random-effects model (inverse variance, restricted maximum likelihood estimation, Hartung-Knapp adjustment). RESULTS:Thirty-four studies (1278 patients; 1283 hips) met criteria. Postoperative functional MCID (27 studies; n = 1005): overall 9.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.11-9.91; I2 = 100%; τ2 = 5.2); open 9.09 (8.12-10.06; six studies; n = 398) versus endoscopic 8.96 (8.02-9.90; 17 studies; n = 607); no subgroup difference (p = 0.63). Change in functional MCID (21 studies; n = 718): overall 3.33 (2.86-3.81; I2 = 83%; τ2 = 0.9); open 3.10 (2.39-3.81; nine studies; n = 290) versus endoscopic 3.52 (2.89-4.15; 12 studies; n = 428); no difference (p = 0.36). Postoperative pain MCID (19 studies; n = 867): overall 1.71 (1.27-2.16; I2 = 98%; τ2 = 0.9); open 1.58 (1.03-2.13; nine studies; n = 349) versus endoscopic 1.81 (1.31-2.32; 11 studies; n = 518); no difference (p = 0.38). Change in pain MCID (19 studies; n = 798): overall -1.99 (-2.74 to -1.24; I2 = 99%; τ2 = 2.5); open -1.82 (-2.96 to -0.69; nine studies; n = 349) versus endoscopic -2.12 (-3.18 to -1.09; 11 studies; n = 449); no difference (p = 0.68). Overall complications (25 studies; n = 804): 58/804 (0.07; 95% CI: 0.05-0.11; I2 = 53%; τ2 = 0.8); open 33/371 (0.08; 0.04-0.16) versus endoscopic 25/433 (0.07; 0.04-0.12); no difference (p = 0.70). CONCLUSION:Open and endoscopic gluteal tendon repair provide clinically meaningful short-term improvements in function and pain, with no relevant differences in efficacy when interpreted using MCID units. These findings support both techniques in clinical practice and favour endoscopic repair when available due to its less invasive nature. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level III, systematic review and meta-analysis of predominantly Level III studies.
Nutraceuticals are food-based products that provide health benefits beyond basic nutrition and play an increasingly important role in preventive healthcare. Ensuring their quality, safety, and efficacy is critical as the global market expands. A systematic literature search was conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed using keywords such as ‘nutraceuticals,’ functional foods,’ and ‘quality control,’ with studies selected based on their focus on methods for standardization, characterization, and quality assessment. This review summarizes current analytical approaches, including spectroscopic, chromatographic, and techniques for elemental analysis, highlighting their applications in compound identification, quantification, detection of adulterants, and overall quality control. Emerging challenges and future trends, such as the integration of chemometrics and real-time analytical strategies, are also discussed, providing a comprehensive perspective on the evolving field of nutraceutical analysis.
