A consensus exercise identifying priorities for research into clinical effectiveness among children's orthopaedic surgeons in the United Kingdom.

PubMed

Perry, D C; Wright, J G; Cooke, S; Roposch, A; Gaston, M S; Nicolaou, N; Theologis, T

2018-05-01

Aims High-quality clinical research in children's orthopaedic surgery has lagged behind other surgical subspecialties. This study used a consensus-based approach to identify research priorities for clinical trials in children's orthopaedics. Methods A modified Delphi technique was used, which involved an initial scoping survey, a two-round Delphi process and an expert panel formed of members of the British Society of Children's Orthopaedic Surgery. The survey was conducted amongst orthopaedic surgeons treating children in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Results A total of 86 clinicians contributed to both rounds of the Delphi process, scoring priorities from one (low priority) to five (high priority). Elective topics were ranked higher than those relating to trauma, with the top ten elective research questions scoring higher than the top question for trauma. Ten elective, and five trauma research priorities were identified, with the three highest ranked questions relating to the treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (mean score 4.6/ 5), Perthes' disease (4.5) and bone infection (4.5). Conclusion This consensus-based research agenda will guide surgeons, academics and funders to improve the evidence in children's orthopaedic surgery and encourage the development of multicentre clinical trials. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:680-4.

Identifying and Prioritizing Information Needs and Research Priorities of Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Practitioners.

PubMed

Siegfried, Alexa L; Carbone, Eric G; Meit, Michael B; Kennedy, Mallory J; Yusuf, Hussain; Kahn, Emily B

2017-10-01

This study describes findings from an assessment conducted to identify perceived knowledge gaps, information needs, and research priorities among state, territorial, and local public health preparedness directors and coordinators related to public health emergency preparedness and response (PHPR). The goal of the study was to gather information that would be useful for ensuring that future funding for research and evaluation targets areas most critical for advancing public health practice. We implemented a mixed-methods approach to identify and prioritize PHPR research questions. A web survey was sent to all state, city, and territorial health agencies funded through the Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) Cooperative Agreement program and a sample of local health departments (LHDs). Three focus groups of state and local practitioners and subject matter experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were subsequently conducted, followed by 3 meetings of an expert panel of PHPR practitioners and CDC experts to prioritize and refine the research questions. We identified a final list of 44 research questions that were deemed by study participants as priority topics where future research can inform PHPR programs and practice. We identified differences in perceived research priorities between PHEP awardees and LHD survey respondents; the number of research questions rated as important was greater among LHDs than among PHEP awardees (75%, n=33, compared to 24%, n=15). The research questions identified provide insight into public health practitioners' perceived knowledge gaps and the types of information that would be most useful for informing and advancing PHPR practice. The study also points to a higher level of information need among LHDs than among PHEP awardees. These findings are important for CDC and the PHPR research community to ensure that future research studies are responsive to practitioners' needs and provide the information

Research Priorities in Spasmodic Dysphonia

PubMed Central

Ludlow, Christy L.; Adler, Charles H.; Berke, Gerald S.; Bielamowicz, Steven A.; Blitzer, Andrew; Bressman, Susan B.; Hallett, Mark; Jinnah, H. A.; Juergens, Uwe; Martin, Sandra B.; Perlmutter, Joel S.; Sapienza, Christine; Singleton, Andrew; Tanner, Caroline M.; Woodson, Gayle E.

2009-01-01

OBJECTIVE To identify research priorities for increasing understanding of the pathogenesis, diagnosis and improved treatment of spasmodic dysphonia. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING A multidisciplinary working group was formed including both scientists and clinicians from multiple disciplines, otolaryngology, neurology, speech pathology, genetics and neuroscience, to review currently available information on spasmodic dysphonia and to identify research priorities. RESULTS Operational definitions for spasmodic dysphonia at different levels of certainty were recommended for diagnosis and recommendations made for a multi-center multidisciplinary validation study. CONCLUSIONS The highest priority is to characterize the disorder and identify risk factors that may contribute to its onset. Future research should compare and contrast spasmodic dysphonia with other forms of focal dystonia. Development of animal models is recommended to explore hypotheses related to pathogenesis. Improved understanding of the pathophysiology of SD should provide the basis for developing new treatment options and exploratory clinical trials. SIGNIFICANCE This document should foster future research to improve the care of patients with this chronic debilitating voice and speech disorder by otolaryngology, neurology, and speech pathology. PMID:18922334

Priority Planetary Science Missions Identified

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Showstack, Randy

2011-03-01

The U.S. National Research Council's (NRC) planetary science decadal survey report, released on 7 March, lays out a grand vision for priority planetary science missions for 2013-2022 within a tightly constrained fiscal environment. The cost-conscious report, issued by NRC's Committee on the Planetary Science Decadal Survey, identifies high-priority flagship missions, recommends a number of potential midsized missions, and indicates support for some smaller missions. The report states that the highest-priority flagship mission for the decade is the Mars Astrobiology Explorer-Cacher (MAX-C)—the first of three components of a NASA/European Space Agency Mars sample return campaign—provided that the mission scope can be reduced so that MAX-C costs no more than $2.5 billion. The currently estimated mission cost of $3.5 billion “would take up a disproportionate near-term share of the overall budget for NASA's Planetary Science Division,” the report notes.

Identifying research priorities with nurses at a tertiary children's hospital in the United Kingdom.

PubMed

Williams, A; Sell, D; Oulton, K; Wilson, N; Wray, J; Gibson, F

2017-03-01

The objective of this study was to undertake a research priority setting exercise with the aim of maximizing efficiency and impact in research activity undertaken by nurses at one children's tertiary healthcare institution by ensuring the clinical staff directly shaped a coherent, transparent and consensus driven nurse-led research agenda. In Round 1, the research topics of 147 nurses were elicited using a modified nominal group technique as the consensus method. The number of participants in the 24 separate discussions ranged from 3 to 21, generating lists of between 6 and 23 topics. In Round 2, nurses from the clinical areas ranked topics of importance resulting in a set of four to five priorities. In Round 3, the divisional heads of nursing consulted with staff in all of their clinical areas to each finalize their five divisional priorities. The Nursing Research Working Group discussed and refined the divisions' priorities and voted on the final list to agree the top five research priorities for the organization. A total of 269 research topics were initially generated. Following three rounds of ranking and prioritizing, five priorities were agreed at Divisional level, and from these, the five top organizational priorities were selected. These were (i) understanding and improving all aspects of the patient journey through the hospital system; (ii) play; (iii) staff wellbeing, patient care and productivity; (iv) team work - linking to a more efficient service; and (v) supporting parents/parent pathway. Divisional priorities have been disseminated widely to clinical teams to inform a patient-specific nurse-led research agenda. Organizational priorities agreed upon have been disseminated through management structures and processes to ensure engagement at all levels. A subgroup of the Nursing Research Working Group has been delegated to take this work forward so that the agreed priorities continue to contribute towards shaping nurse-led research activity, thereby

Setting Research Priorities for Kidney Cancer.

PubMed

Jones, Jennifer M; Bhatt, Jaimin; Avery, Jonathan; Laupacis, Andreas; Cowan, Katherine; Basappa, Naveen S; Basiuk, Joan; Canil, Christina; Al-Asaaed, Sohaib; Heng, Daniel Y C; Wood, Lori; Stacey, Dawn; Kollmannsberger, Christian; Jewett, Michael A S

2017-12-01

Defining disease-specific research priorities in cancer can facilitate better allocation of limited resources. Involving patients and caregivers as well as expert clinicians in this process is of value. We undertook this approach for kidney cancer as an example. The Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada sponsored a collaborative consensus-based priority-setting partnership that identified ten research priorities in the management of kidney cancer. These are discussed in the context of current initiatives and gaps in knowledge. Copyright © 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Identifying spatial priorities for protecting ecosystem services

PubMed Central

Luck, Gary W

2012-01-01

Priorities for protecting ecosystem services must be identified to ensure future human well-being. Approaches to broad-scale spatial prioritization of ecosystem services are becoming increasingly popular and are a vital precursor to identifying locations where further detailed analyses of the management of ecosystem services is required (e.g., examining trade-offs among management actions). Prioritization approaches often examine the spatial congruence between priorities for protecting ecosystem services and priorities for protecting biodiversity; therefore, the spatial prioritization method used is crucial because it will influence the alignment of service protection and conservation goals. While spatial prioritization of ecosystem services and prioritization for conservation share similarities, such as the need to document threats and costs, the former differs substantially from the latter owing to the requirement to measure the following components: supply of services; availability of human-derived alternatives to service provision; capacity to meet beneficiary demand; and site dependency in and scale of service delivery. We review studies that identify broad-scale spatial priorities for managing ecosystem services and demonstrate that researchers have used different approaches and included various measures for identifying priorities, and most studies do not consider all of the components listed above. We describe a conceptual framework for integrating each of these components into spatial prioritization of ecosystem services and illustrate our approach using a worked example for water provision. A fuller characterization of the biophysical and social context for ecosystem services that we call for should improve future prioritization and the identification of locations where ecosystem-service management is especially important or cost effective. PMID:24555017

Identifying Priorities for International Arctic Research and Policy

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Rachold, V.; Hik, D.; Barr, S.

2015-12-01

Participants. This paper presents an overview of IASC´s efforts and achievements in terms of identifying Arctic research priorities and providing scientific expertise to policy makers and people who live in or near the Arctic.

Identifying research priorities in anaesthesia and perioperative care: final report of the joint National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia/James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Boney, Oliver; Bell, Madeline; Bell, Natalie; Conquest, Ann; Cumbers, Marion; Drake, Sharon; Galsworthy, Mike; Gath, Jacqui; Grocott, Michael P W; Harris, Emma; Howell, Simon; Ingold, Anthony; Nathanson, Michael H; Pinkney, Thomas; Metcalf, Leanne

2015-01-01

Objective To identify research priorities for Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine. Design Prospective surveys and consensus meetings guided by an independent adviser. Setting UK. Participants 45 stakeholder organisations (25 professional, 20 patient/carer) affiliated as James Lind Alliance partners. Outcomes First ‘ideas-gathering’ survey: Free text research ideas and suggestions. Second ‘prioritisation’ survey: Shortlist of ‘summary’ research questions (derived from the first survey) ranked by respondents in order of priority. Final ‘top ten’: Agreed by consensus at a final prioritisation workshop. Results First survey: 1420 suggestions received from 623 respondents (49% patients/public) were refined into a shortlist of 92 ‘summary’ questions. Second survey: 1718 respondents each nominated up to 10 questions as research priorities. Top ten: The 25 highest-ranked questions advanced to the final workshop, where 23 stakeholders (13 professional, 10 patient/carer) agreed the 10 most important questions: ▸ What can we do to stop patients developing chronic pain after surgery? ▸ How can patient care around the time of emergency surgery be improved? ▸ What long-term harm may result from anaesthesia, particularly following repeated anaesthetics? ▸ What outcomes should we use to measure the ‘success’ of anaesthesia and perioperative care? ▸ How can we improve recovery from surgery for elderly patients? ▸ For which patients does regional anaesthesia give better outcomes than general anaesthesia? ▸ What are the effects of anaesthesia on the developing brain? ▸ Do enhanced recovery programmes improve short and long-term outcomes? ▸ How can preoperative exercise or fitness training, including physiotherapy, improve outcomes after surgery? ▸ How can we improve communication between the teams looking after patients throughout their surgical journey? Conclusions Almost 2000 stakeholders contributed their views

Identifying research priorities in anaesthesia and perioperative care: final report of the joint National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia/James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Boney, Oliver; Bell, Madeline; Bell, Natalie; Conquest, Ann; Cumbers, Marion; Drake, Sharon; Galsworthy, Mike; Gath, Jacqui; Grocott, Michael P W; Harris, Emma; Howell, Simon; Ingold, Anthony; Nathanson, Michael H; Pinkney, Thomas; Metcalf, Leanne

2015-12-16

To identify research priorities for Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine. Prospective surveys and consensus meetings guided by an independent adviser. UK. 45 stakeholder organisations (25 professional, 20 patient/carer) affiliated as James Lind Alliance partners. First 'ideas-gathering' survey: Free text research ideas and suggestions. Second 'prioritisation' survey: Shortlist of 'summary' research questions (derived from the first survey) ranked by respondents in order of priority. Final 'top ten': Agreed by consensus at a final prioritisation workshop. First survey: 1420 suggestions received from 623 respondents (49% patients/public) were refined into a shortlist of 92 'summary' questions. Second survey: 1718 respondents each nominated up to 10 questions as research priorities. Top ten: The 25 highest-ranked questions advanced to the final workshop, where 23 stakeholders (13 professional, 10 patient/carer) agreed the 10 most important questions: ▸ What can we do to stop patients developing chronic pain after surgery? ▸ How can patient care around the time of emergency surgery be improved? ▸ What long-term harm may result from anaesthesia, particularly following repeated anaesthetics?▸ What outcomes should we use to measure the 'success' of anaesthesia and perioperative care? ▸ How can we improve recovery from surgery for elderly patients? ▸ For which patients does regional anaesthesia give better outcomes than general anaesthesia? ▸ What are the effects of anaesthesia on the developing brain? ▸ Do enhanced recovery programmes improve short and long-term outcomes? ▸ How can preoperative exercise or fitness training, including physiotherapy, improve outcomes after surgery? ▸ How can we improve communication between the teams looking after patients throughout their surgical journey? Almost 2000 stakeholders contributed their views regarding anaesthetic and perioperative research priorities. This is the largest example of patient and public

Dreissenid mussel research priorities workshop

USGS Publications Warehouse

Sytsma, Mark; Phillips, Stephen; Counihan, Timothy D.

2015-01-01

Currently, dreissenid mussels have yet to be detected in the northwestern part of the United States and western Canada. Infestation of one of the jurisdictions within the mussel-free Pacific Northwest would likely have significant economic, soci­etal and environmental implications for the entire region. Understanding the biology and environmental tolerances of dreissenid mussels, and effectiveness of various man­agement strategies, is key to prevention.On November 4-5, 2015, the Aquatic Bioinvasion Research and Policy Institute and the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University, the US Geological Survey, and the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, convened a Dreissenid Mussel Research Priorities Workshop funded by the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative. The purpose of the workshop was to review dreissenid research priorities in the 2010 Quagga-Zebra Mussel Action Plan for Western U.S. Waters, reassess those priorities, incorporate new information and emerging trends, and develop priorities to strategically focus research efforts on zebra and quagga mussels in the Pacific Northwest and ensure that future research is focused on the highest priorities. It is important to note that there is some repetition among dreissenid research priority categories (e.g., prevention, detection, control, monitoring, and biology).Workshop participants with research experience in dreissenid mussel biology and management were identified by a literature review. State and federal agency managers were also invited to the workshop to ensure relevancy and practicality of the work­shop outcomes. A total of 28 experts (see sidebar) in mussel biology, ecology, and management attended the workshop.

Perspectives of Patients, Caregivers and Researchers on Research Priorities in Donation and Transplantation in Canada: A Pilot Workshop.

PubMed

Allard, Julie; Durand, Céline; Anthony, Samantha J; Dumez, Vincent; Hartell, David; Hébert, Marie-Josée; West, Lori J; Wright, Linda; Fortin, Marie-Chantal

2017-02-01

It is vitally important to seek input from key stakeholders to increase the quality and relevance of health-related research and accelerate its adoption into practice. Patients and caregivers have rarely been involved in setting research priorities in the transplantation and donation field. The objectives of this explorative study are: (i) to discuss research priorities within the Canadian National Transplant Research Program during a priority-setting exercise with patients, caregivers, organ donors and researchers and (ii) to compare the identified priorities with research published in 2 prestigious transplantation journals. A pilot workshop attended by 10 patients and caregivers and 5 researchers was held in Montréal (Quebec, Canada) in August 2014 to identify research priorities. Priorities were identified using a thematic analysis of the workshop transcription conducted by multiple coders. These priorities were compared with the topics of research articles published in 2 major transplantation journals between 2012 and 2014. The themes of the 10 research priorities identified by study participants were related to different research domains: social, cultural, and environmental health factors (4); biomedical or clinical (4); and research about health systems and services (2). 26.7% of the research articles published were related to the identified priorities. Thirteen percent looked at ways to improve graft survival and 8.5% looked at the development of tolerance, 2 priorities identified by participants. Fewer than 5% examined the other 8 research priorities identified as important by workshop participants. This is the first study reporting patients' and researchers' priorities in the field of transplantation and donation in Canada. There is a discrepancy between topics that key stakeholders find important and research published in 2 major transplantation journals. The research priorities identified during our initial workshop will be validated through a national

Perspectives of Patients, Caregivers and Researchers on Research Priorities in Donation and Transplantation in Canada: A Pilot Workshop

PubMed Central

Allard, Julie; Durand, Céline; Anthony, Samantha J.; Dumez, Vincent; Hartell, David; Hébert, Marie-Josée; West, Lori J.; Wright, Linda; Fortin, Marie-Chantal

2017-01-01

Background It is vitally important to seek input from key stakeholders to increase the quality and relevance of health-related research and accelerate its adoption into practice. Patients and caregivers have rarely been involved in setting research priorities in the transplantation and donation field. The objectives of this explorative study are: (i) to discuss research priorities within the Canadian National Transplant Research Program during a priority-setting exercise with patients, caregivers, organ donors and researchers and (ii) to compare the identified priorities with research published in 2 prestigious transplantation journals. Methods A pilot workshop attended by 10 patients and caregivers and 5 researchers was held in Montréal (Quebec, Canada) in August 2014 to identify research priorities. Priorities were identified using a thematic analysis of the workshop transcription conducted by multiple coders. These priorities were compared with the topics of research articles published in 2 major transplantation journals between 2012 and 2014. Results The themes of the 10 research priorities identified by study participants were related to different research domains: social, cultural, and environmental health factors (4); biomedical or clinical (4); and research about health systems and services (2). 26.7% of the research articles published were related to the identified priorities. Thirteen percent looked at ways to improve graft survival and 8.5% looked at the development of tolerance, 2 priorities identified by participants. Fewer than 5% examined the other 8 research priorities identified as important by workshop participants. Conclusions This is the first study reporting patients' and researchers' priorities in the field of transplantation and donation in Canada. There is a discrepancy between topics that key stakeholders find important and research published in 2 major transplantation journals. The research priorities identified during our initial

Setting priorities for zinc-related health research to reduce children's disease burden worldwide: an application of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative's research priority-setting method.

PubMed

Brown, Kenneth H; Hess, Sonja Y; Boy, Erick; Gibson, Rosalind S; Horton, Susan; Osendarp, Saskia J; Sempertegui, Fernando; Shrimpton, Roger; Rudan, Igor

2009-03-01

To make the best use of limited resources for supporting health-related research to reduce child mortality, it is necessary to apply a suitable method to rank competing research options. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) developed a new methodology for setting health research priorities. To broaden experience with this priority-setting technique, we applied the method to rank possible research priorities concerning the control of Zn deficiency. Although Zn deficiency is not generally recognized as a direct cause of child mortality, recent research indicates that it predisposes children to an increased incidence and severity of several of the major direct causes of morbidity and mortality. Leading experts in the field of Zn research in child health were identified and invited to participate in a technical working group (TWG) to establish research priorities. The individuals were chosen to represent a wide range of expertise in Zn nutrition. The seven TWG members submitted a total of ninety research options, which were then consolidated into a final list of thirty-one research options categorized by the type of resulting intervention. The identified priorities were dominated by research investment options targeting Zn supplementation, and were followed by research on Zn fortification, general aspects of Zn nutrition, dietary modification and other new interventions. In general, research options that aim to improve the efficiency of an already existing intervention strategy received higher priority scores. Challenges identified during the implementation of the methodology and suggestions to modify the priority-setting procedures are discussed.

Improvement Research Priorities: USA Survey and Expert Consensus

PubMed Central

Stevens, Kathleen R.; Ovretveit, John

2013-01-01

The purpose of this study was to identify stakeholder views about national priorities for improvement science and build agreement for action in a national improvement and implementation research network in the USA. This was accomplished using three stages of identification and consensus. (1) Topics were identified through a multipronged environmental scan of the literature and initiatives. (2) Based on this scan, a survey was developed, and stakeholders (n = 2,777) were invited to rate the resulting 33-topic, 9-category list, via an online survey. Data from 560 respondents (20% response) were analyzed. (3) An expert panel used survey results to further refine the research priorities through a Rand Delphi process. Priorities identified were within four categories: care coordination and transitions, high-performing clinical systems and microsystems improvement approaches, implementation of evidence-based improvements and best practices, and culture of quality and safety. The priorities identified were adopted by the improvement science research network as the research agenda to guide strategy. The process and conclusions may be of value to quality improvement research funding agencies, governments, and research units seeking to concentrate their resources on improvement topics where research is capable of yielding timely and actionable answers as well as contributing to the knowledge base for improvement. PMID:24024029

Research priorities in occupational health in Italy

PubMed Central

Iavicoli, S; Marinaccio, A; Vonesch, N; Ursini, C; Grandi, C; Palmi, S

2001-01-01

OBJECTIVE—To find a broad consensus on research priorities and strategies in the field of occupational health and safety in Italy.
METHODS—A two phase questionnaire survey was based on the Delphi technique previously described in other reports. 310 Occupational safety and health specialists (from universities and local health units) were given an open questionnaire (to identify three priority research areas). The data obtained from respondents (175, 56.4%) were then used to draw up a list of 27 priority topics grouped together into five macrosectors. Each of these was given a score ranging from 1 (of little importance) to 5 ( extremely important). With the mean scores obtained from a total of 203 respondents (65.4%), it was possible to place the 27 topics in rank order according to a scale of priorities.
RESULTS—Among the macrosectors, first place was given to the question of methodological approach to research in this field, and for individual topics, occupational carcinogenesis and quality in occupational medicine were ranked first and second, respectively. The question of exposure to low doses of environmental pollutants and multiple exposures ranked third among the priorities; the development of adequate and effective approaches and methods for worker education and participation in prevention was also perceived as being an important issue (fourth place).
CONCLUSIONS—This study (the first of its kind in Italy) enabled us to achieve an adequate degree of consensus on research priorities related to the protection of occupational health and safety. Disparities in the mean scores of some of the issues identified overall as being research priorities, seem to be linked both to geographical area and to whether respondents worked in local health units or universities. This finding requires debate and further analysis.


Keywords: research priorities; occupational health; strategies PMID:11303082

Research Priorities for Endometriosis.

PubMed

Rogers, Peter A W; Adamson, G David; Al-Jefout, Moamar; Becker, Christian M; D'Hooghe, Thomas M; Dunselman, Gerard A J; Fazleabas, Asgerally; Giudice, Linda C; Horne, Andrew W; Hull, M Louise; Hummelshoj, Lone; Missmer, Stacey A; Montgomery, Grant W; Stratton, Pamela; Taylor, Robert N; Rombauts, Luk; Saunders, Philippa T; Vincent, Katy; Zondervan, Krina T

2017-02-01

The 3rd International Consensus Workshop on Research Priorities in Endometriosis was held in São Paulo on May 4, 2014, following the 12th World Congress on Endometriosis. The workshop was attended by 60 participants from 19 countries and was divided into 5 main sessions covering pathogenesis/pathophysiology, symptoms, diagnosis/classification/prognosis, disease/symptom management, and research policy. This research priorities consensus statement builds on earlier efforts to develop research directions for endometriosis. Of the 56 research recommendations from the 2011 meeting in Montpellier, a total of 41 remained unchanged, 13 were updated, and 2 were deemed to be completed. Fifty-three new research recommendations were made at the 2014 meeting in Sao Paulo, which in addition to the 13 updated recommendations resulted in a total of 66 new recommendations for research. The research recommendations published herein, as well as those from the 2 previous papers from international consensus workshops, are an attempt to promote high-quality research in endometriosis by identifying and agreeing on key issues that require investigation. New areas included in the 2014 recommendations include infertility, patient stratification, and research in emerging nations, in addition to an increased focus on translational research. A revised and updated set of research priorities that builds on this document will be developed at the 13th World Congress on Endometriosis to be held on May 17-20, 2017, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Research Priorities for Endometriosis

PubMed Central

Rogers, Peter A. W.; Adamson, G. David; Al-Jefout, Moamar; Becker, Christian M.; D’Hooghe, Thomas M.; Dunselman, Gerard A. J.; Fazleabas, Asgerally; Giudice, Linda C.; Horne, Andrew W.; Hull, M. Louise; Hummelshoj, Lone; Missmer, Stacey A.; Montgomery, Grant W.; Stratton, Pamela; Taylor, Robert N.; Rombauts, Luk; Saunders, Philippa T.; Vincent, Katy; Zondervan, Krina T.; Adamson, G. David

2016-01-01

The 3rd International Consensus Workshop on Research Priorities in Endometriosis was held in São Paulo on May 4, 2014, following the 12th World Congress on Endometriosis. The workshop was attended by 60 participants from 19 countries and was divided into 5 main sessions covering pathogenesis/pathophysiology, symptoms, diagnosis/classification/prognosis, disease/symptom management, and research policy. This research priorities consensus statement builds on earlier efforts to develop research directions for endometriosis. Of the 56 research recommendations from the 2011 meeting in Montpellier, a total of 41 remained unchanged, 13 were updated, and 2 were deemed to be completed. Fifty-three new research recommendations were made at the 2014 meeting in Sao Paulo, which in addition to the 13 updated recommendations resulted in a total of 66 new recommendations for research. The research recommendations published herein, as well as those from the 2 previous papers from international consensus workshops, are an attempt to promote high-quality research in endometriosis by identifying and agreeing on key issues that require investigation. New areas included in the 2014 recommendations include infertility, patient stratification, and research in emerging nations, in addition to an increased focus on translational research. A revised and updated set of research priorities that builds on this document will be developed at the 13th World Congress on Endometriosis to be held on May 17–20, 2017, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. PMID:27368878

Occupational health research priorities in Malaysia: a Delphi study

PubMed Central

Sadhra, S; Beach, J; Aw, T; Sheikh-Ahmed, K

2001-01-01

OBJECTIVES—As part of a consultancy project on occupational health, the Delphi method was used to identify research priorities in occupational health in Malaysia.
METHODS—Participation was sought from government ministries, industry, and professional organisations, and university departments with an interest in occupational and public health. Two rounds of questionnaires resulted in a final list of priorities, with noticeable differences between participants depending on whether they worked in industry or were from government organisations.
RESULTS—The participation rate of 71% (55 of 78) was obtained for the first questionnaire and 76% (72 of 95) for the second questionnaire. The participants identified occupational health problems for specific groups and industries as the top research priority area (ranked as top priority by 25% of participants). Ministry of Health participants placed emphasis on healthcare workers (52% ranking it as top priority), whereas those from industry identified construction and plantation workers as groups, which should be accorded the highest priority. Evaluation of research and services was given a low priority.
CONCLUSIONS—The priorities for occupational health determined with the Delphi approach showed differences between Malaysia, a developing country, and findings from similar European studies. This may be expected, as differences exist in stages of economic development, types of industries, occupational activities, and cultural attitudes to occupational health and safety. Chemical poisonings and workplace accidents were accorded a high priority. By contrast with findings from western countries, workplace psychosocial problems and musculoskeletal injuries were deemed less important. There also seemed to be greater emphasis on adopting interventions for identified problems based on experience in other countries rather than the need to evaluate local occupational health provisions.


Keywords: occupational

Setting research priorities for Type 1 diabetes.

PubMed

Gadsby, R; Snow, R; Daly, A C; Crowe, S; Matyka, K; Hall, B; Petrie, J

2012-10-01

Research priorities are often set by academic researchers or the pharmaceutical industry. The interests of patients, carers and clinicians may therefore be overlooked and research questions that matter may be neglected. The aims of this study were to collect uncertainties about the treatment of Type 1 diabetes from patients, carers and health professionals, and to collate and prioritize these uncertainties to develop a top 10 list of research priorities, using a structured priority-setting partnership of patients, carers, health professionals and diabetes organizations, as described by the James Lind Alliance. A partnership of interested organizations was set up, and from this a steering committee of 10 individuals was formed. An online and paper survey was used to identify uncertainties. These were collated, and the steering group carried out an interim priority-setting exercise with partner organizations. This group of uncertainties was then voted on to give a smaller list that went forward to the final priority-setting workshop. At this meeting, a final list of the top 10 research priorities was agreed. An initial 1141 uncertainties were described. These were reduced to 88 indicative questions, 47 of which went out for voting. Twenty-four were then taken forward to a final priority-setting workshop. This workshop resulted in a list of top 10 research priorities in Type 1 diabetes. We have shown that it is possible using the James Lind Alliance process to develop an agreed top 10 list of research priorities for Type 1 diabetes from health professionals, patients and carers. © 2012 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2012 Diabetes UK.

Effective stakeholder participation in setting research priorities using a Global Evidence Mapping approach.

PubMed

Clavisi, Ornella; Bragge, Peter; Tavender, Emma; Turner, Tari; Gruen, Russell L

2013-05-01

We present a multistep process for identifying priority research areas in rehabilitation and long-term care of traumatic brain-injured (TBI) patients. In particular, we aimed to (1) identify which stakeholders should be involved; (2) identify what methods are appropriate; (3) examine different criteria for the generation of research priority areas; and (4) test the feasibility of linkage and exchange among researchers, decision makers, and other potential users of the research. Potential research questions were identified and developed using an initial scoping meeting and preliminary literature search, followed by a facilitated mapping workshop and an online survey. Identified research questions were then prioritized against specific criteria (clinical importance, novelty, and controversy). Existing evidence was then mapped to the high-priority questions using usual processes for search, screening, and selection. A broad range of stakeholders were then brought together at a forum to identify priority research themes for future research investment. Using clinical and research leaders, smaller targeted planning workshops prioritized specific research projects for each of the identified themes. Twenty-six specific questions about TBI rehabilitation were generated, 14 of which were high priority. No one method identified all high-priority questions. Methods that relied solely on the views of clinicians and researchers identified fewer high-priority questions compared with methods that used broader stakeholder engagement. Evidence maps of these high-priority questions yielded a number of evidence gaps. Priority questions and evidence maps were then used to inform a research forum, which identified 12 priority themes for future research. Our research demonstrates the value of a multistep and multimethod process involving many different types of stakeholders for prioritizing research to improve the rehabilitation outcomes of people who have suffered TBI. Enhancing

Occupational health research priorities in Malaysia: a Delphi study.

PubMed

Sadhra, S; Beach, J R; Aw, T C; Sheikh-Ahmed, K

2001-07-01

As part of a consultancy project on occupational health, the Delphi method was used to identify research priorities in occupational health in Malaysia. Participation was sought from government ministries, industry, and professional organisations, and university departments with an interest in occupational and public health. Two rounds of questionnaires resulted in a final list of priorities, with noticeable differences between participants depending on whether they worked in industry or were from government organisations. The participation rate of 71% (55 of 78) was obtained for the first questionnaire and 76% (72 of 95) for the second questionnaire. The participants identified occupational health problems for specific groups and industries as the top research priority area (ranked as top priority by 25% of participants). Ministry of Health participants placed emphasis on healthcare workers (52% ranking it as top priority), whereas those from industry identified construction and plantation workers as groups, which should be accorded the highest priority. Evaluation of research and services was given a low priority. The priorities for occupational health determined with the Delphi approach showed differences between Malaysia, a developing country, and findings from similar European studies. This may be expected, as differences exist in stages of economic development, types of industries, occupational activities, and cultural attitudes to occupational health and safety. Chemical poisonings and workplace accidents were accorded a high priority. By contrast with findings from western countries, workplace psychosocial problems and musculoskeletal injuries were deemed less important. There also seemed to be greater emphasis on adopting interventions for identified problems based on experience in other countries rather than the need to evaluate local occupational health provisions.

Identifying management and disease priorities of Canadian dairy industry stakeholders.

PubMed

Bauman, C A; Barkema, H W; Dubuc, J; Keefe, G P; Kelton, D F

2016-12-01

The objective of this study was to identify the key management and disease issues affecting the Canadian dairy industry. An online questionnaire (FluidSurveys, http://fluidsurveys.com/) was conducted between March 1 and May 31, 2014. A total of 1,025 responses were received from across Canada of which 68% (n=698) of respondents were dairy producers, and the remaining respondents represented veterinarians, university researchers, government personnel, and other allied industries. Participants were asked to identify their top 3 management and disease priorities from 2 lists offered. Topics were subsequently ranked from highest to lowest using 3 different ranking methods based on points: 5-3-1 (5 points for first priority, 3 for second, and 1 for first), 3-2-1, and 1-1-1 (equal ranking). The 5-3-1 point system was selected because it minimized the number of duplicate point scores. Stakeholder groups showed general agreement with the top management issue identified as animal welfare and the number one health concern as lameness. Other areas identified as priorities were reproductive health, antibiotic use, bovine viral diarrhea, and Staphylococcus aureus mastitis with these rankings influenced by region, herd size, and stakeholder group. This is the first national comprehensive assessment of priorities undertaken in the Canadian dairy industry and will assist researchers, policymakers, program developers, and funding agencies make future decisions based on direct industry feedback. Copyright © 2016 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Patients', clinicians' and the research communities' priorities for treatment research: there is an important mismatch.

PubMed

Crowe, Sally; Fenton, Mark; Hall, Matthew; Cowan, Katherine; Chalmers, Iain

2015-01-01

There is some evidence that there is a mismatch between what patients and health professionals want to see researched and the research that is actually done. The James Lind Alliance (JLA) research Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) were created to address this mismatch. Between 2007 and 2014, JLA partnerships of patients, carers and health professionals agreed on important treatment research questions (priorities) in a range of health conditions, such as Type 1 diabetes, eczema and stroke. We were interested in how much these JLA PSP priorities were similar to treatments undergoing evaluation and research over the same time span. We identified the treatments described in all the JLA PSP research priority lists and compared these to the treatments described in a group of research studies (randomly selected) registered publically. The priorities identified by JLA PSPs emphasised the importance of non-drug treatment research, compared to the research actually being done over the same time period, which mostly involved evaluations of drugs. These findings suggest that the research community should make greater efforts to address issues of importance to users of research, such as patients and healthcare professionals. Background Comparisons of treatment research priorities identified by patients and clinicians with research actually being done by researchers are very rare. One of the best known of these comparisons (Tallon et al. Relation between agendas of the research community and the research consumer 355:2037-40, 2000) revealed important mismatches in priorities in the assessment of treatments for osteoarthritis of the knee: researchers preferenced drug trials, patients and clinicians prioritised non-drug treatments. These findings were an important stimulus in creating the James Lind Alliance (JLA). The JLA supports research Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) of patients, carers and clinicians, who are actively involved in all aspects of the process, to

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: identifying high priority future research needs.

PubMed

Gaynes, Bradley N; Christian, Robert; Saavedra, Lissette M; Wines, Roberta; Jonas, Daniel E; Viswanathan, Meera; Ellis, Alan R; Woodell, Carol; Carey, Timothy S

2014-03-01

With onset often occurring before 6 years of age, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) involves attention problems, impulsivity, overactivity, and sometimes disruptive behavior. Impairment usually persists into adulthood, with an estimated worldwide prevalence in adults of 2.5%. Existing gaps in evidence concerning ADHD hinder decision-making about treatment. This article describes and prioritizes future research needs for ADHD in three areas: treatment effectiveness for at-risk preschoolers; long-term treatment effectiveness; and variability in prevalence, diagnosis, and treatment.Using a recent systematic review concerning ADHD completed by a different evidence-based practice center as a foundation, we worked with a diverse group of 12 stakeholders, who represented researchers, funders, healthcare providers, patients, and families, to identify and prioritize research needs. From an initial list of 29 evidence gaps, we enumerated 8 high-priority research needs: a) accurate, brief standardized diagnosis and assessment; b) comparative effectiveness and safety of pharmacologic treatments for children under 6 years of age; c) comparative effectiveness of different combinations of psychosocial and pharmacologic treatments for children under 6 years of age; d) case identification and measurement of prevalence and outcomes; e) comparative effectiveness of psychosocial treatment alone versus pharmacologic and combination treatments for children under 6 years of age; f) comparative long-term treatment effectiveness for people 6 years of age and older; g) relative efficacy of specific psychosocial program components for children under 6 years of age; and h) identification of person-level effect modifiers for people 6 years of age and older. In this article, we describe these future research needs in detail and discuss study designs that could be used to address them.

Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC): Patient/Family-Informed Research Priorities for Pediatric Emergency Medicine.

PubMed

Bialy, Liza; Plint, Amy C; Freedman, Stephen B; Johnson, David W; Curran, Janet A; Stang, Antonia S

2018-06-06

A growing body of literature supports patient and public involvement in the design, prioritization and dissemination of research and evidence based medicine. The objectives of this project were to engage patients and families in developing a prioritized list of research topics for Pediatric Emergency Medicine (PEM) and to compare results with prior research prioritization initiatives in the ED (emergency department) setting. We utilized a systematic process to combine administrative data on frequency of patient presentations to the ED with multiple stakeholder input including an initial stakeholder survey followed by a modified Delphi consensus methodology consisting of two web-based surveys and a face-to-face meeting. The prioritization process resulted in a ranked list of 15 research priorities. The top five priorities were mental health presentations, pain and sedation, practice tools, quality of care delivery and resource utilization. Mental health, pain and sedation, clinical prediction rules, respiratory illnesses /wheeze, patient safety/medication error and sepsis were identified as shared priorities with prior initiatives. Topics identified in our process that were not identified in prior work included resource utilization, ED communication, antibiotic stewardship and patient/family adherence with recommendations. This work identifies key priorities for research in PEM. Comparing our results with prior initiatives in the ED setting identified shared research priorities and opportunities for collaboration among PEM research networks. This work in particular makes an important contribution to the existing literature by including the patient/family perspective missing from prior work. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Refining Current Scientific Priorities and Identifying New Scientific Gaps in HIV-Related Heart, Lung, Blood, and Sleep Research.

PubMed

Twigg, Homer L; Crystal, Ronald; Currier, Judith; Ridker, Paul; Berliner, Nancy; Kiem, Hans-Peter; Rutherford, George; Zou, Shimian; Glynn, Simone; Wong, Renee; Peprah, Emmanuel; Engelgau, Michael; Creazzo, Tony; Colombini-Hatch, Sandra; Caler, Elisabet

2017-09-01

The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) AIDS Program's goal is to provide direction and support for research and training programs in areas of HIV-related heart, lung, blood, and sleep (HLBS) diseases. To better define NHLBI current HIV-related scientific priorities and with the goal of identifying new scientific priorities and gaps in HIV-related HLBS research, a wide group of investigators gathered for a scientific NHLBI HIV Working Group on December 14-15, 2015, in Bethesda, MD. The core objectives of the Working Group included discussions on: (1) HIV-related HLBS comorbidities in the antiretroviral era; (2) HIV cure; (3) HIV prevention; and (4) mechanisms to implement new scientific discoveries in an efficient and timely manner so as to have the most impact on people living with HIV. The 2015 Working Group represented an opportunity for the NHLBI to obtain expert advice on HIV/AIDS scientific priorities and approaches over the next decade.

Establishing research priorities for patient safety in emergency medicine: a multidisciplinary consensus panel.

PubMed

Plint, Amy C; Stang, Antonia S; Calder, Lisa A

2015-01-01

Patient safety in the context of emergency medicine is a relatively new field of study. To date, no broad research agenda for patient safety in emergency medicine has been established. The objective of this study was to establish patient safety-related research priorities for emergency medicine. These priorities would provide a foundation for high-quality research, important direction to both researchers and health-care funders, and an essential step in improving health-care safety and patient outcomes in the high-risk emergency department (ED) setting. A four-phase consensus procedure with a multidisciplinary expert panel was organized to identify, assess, and agree on research priorities for patient safety in emergency medicine. The 19-member panel consisted of clinicians, administrators, and researchers from adult and pediatric emergency medicine, patient safety, pharmacy, and mental health; as well as representatives from patient safety organizations. In phase 1, we developed an initial list of potential research priorities by electronically surveying a purposeful and convenience sample of patient safety experts, ED clinicians, administrators, and researchers from across North America using contact lists from multiple organizations. We used simple content analysis to remove duplication and categorize the research priorities identified by survey respondents. Our expert panel reached consensus on a final list of research priorities through an in-person meeting (phase 3) and two rounds of a modified Delphi process (phases 2 and 4). After phases 1 and 2, 66 unique research priorities were identified for expert panel review. At the end of phase 4, consensus was reached for 15 research priorities. These priorities represent four themes: (1) methods to identify patient safety issues (five priorities), (2) understanding human and environmental factors related to patient safety (four priorities), (3) the patient perspective (one priority), and (4) interventions for

Future Research Priorities for Morbidity Control of Lymphedema.

PubMed

Narahari, S R; Aggithaya, Madhur Guruprasad; Moffatt, Christine; Ryan, T J; Keeley, Vaughan; Vijaya, B; Rajendran, P; Karalam, S B; Rajagopala, S; Kumar, N K; Bose, K S; Sushma, K V

2017-01-01

Innovation in the treatment of lower extremity lymphedema has received low priority from the governments and pharmaceutical industry. Advancing lymphedema is irreversible and initiates fibrosis in the dermis, reactive changes in the epidermis and subcutis. Most medical treatments offered for lymphedema are either too demanding with a less than satisfactory response or patients have low concordance due to complex schedules. A priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to decide on the future priorities in lymphedema research. A table of abstracts following a literature search was published in workshop website. Stake holders were requested to upload their priorities. Their questions were listed, randomized, and sent to lymphologists for ranking. High ranked ten research priorities, obtained through median score, were presented in final prioritization work shop attended by invited stake holders. A free medical camp was organized during workshop to understand patients' priorities. One hundred research priorities were selected from priorities uploaded to website. Ten priorities were short listed through a peer review process involving 12 lymphologists, for final discussion. They were related to simplification of integrative treatment for lymphedema, cellular changes in lymphedema and mechanisms of its reversal, eliminating bacterial entry lesions to reduce cellulitis episodes, exploring evidence for therapies in traditional medicine, improving patient concordance to compression therapy, epidemiology of lymphatic filariasis (LF), and economic benefit of integrative treatments of lymphedema. A robust research priority setting process, organized as described in James Lind Alliance guidebook, identified seven priority areas to achieve effective morbidity control of lymphedema including LF. All stake holders including Department of Health Research, Government of India, participated in the PSP.

Research priorities in mental health occupational therapy: A study of clinician perspectives.

PubMed

Hitch, Danielle; Lhuede, Kate

2015-10-01

The evidence to support mental health occupational therapy has proliferated in the early years of this century, but this growth has tended to be organic rather than targeted. Previous efforts to identify research priorities in this area of practice are either out dated, or encompass discrete areas of practice. The aim of this study was to identify priority areas for research in mental health occupational therapy from clinician's perspectives. A Policy Delphi method was used to enable occupational therapists to define and differentiate their perspectives on research priorities. Forty-two occupational therapists took part in the first two rounds of this method, with 69% (n = 29) going on to complete the third and final round of data collection. A Likert scale was used to rate the importance of each priority, and descriptive quantitative analysis undertaken to identify those most consistently identified as being highly important. Four research priorities were identified as being highly important in this study: (i) working in an occupationally focussed way; (ii) consumer experience of therapy groups; (iii) identifying factors which increase consumer engagement in occupation; and (iv) engaging patients on the inpatient unit in meaningful and positive occupation. Two of the priority areas are already the subject of substantial evidence bases, but there has been far less research into consumer experiences of groups and occupational engagement in acute settings. Collaboration between research teams and greater consumer inclusion are recommended for the future. This study provides an updated indication of research priorities for mental health occupational therapy in Australia. © 2015 Occupational Therapy Australia.

Creating a Research Agenda and Setting Research Priorities for Clinical Nurse Specialists.

PubMed

Foster, Jan; Bautista, Cynthia; Ellstrom, Kathleen; Kalowes, Peggy; Manning, Jennifer; Pasek, Tracy Ann

The purpose of this article is to describe the evolution and results of the process for establishing a research agenda and identification of research priorities for clinical nurse specialists, approved by the National Association of Clinical Nurse Specialists (NACNS) membership and sanctioned by the NACNS Board of Directors. Development of the research agenda and identification of the priorities were an iterative process and involved a review of the literature; input from multiple stakeholders, including individuals with expertise in conducting research serving as task force members, and NACNS members; and feedback from national board members. A research agenda, which is to provide an enduring research platform, was established and research priorities, which are to be applied in the immediate future, were identified as a result of this process. Development of a research agenda and identification of research priorities are a key method of fulfilling the mission and goals of NACNS. The process and outcomes are described in this article.

High Priority Research Needs for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

PubMed Central

Robinson, Karen A.; Saldanha, Ian J.; Wilson, Lisa M.; Nicholson, Wanda K.

2012-01-01

Abstract Objective Identification of unanswered research questions about the management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is necessary to focus future research endeavors. We developed a process for elucidating the highest priority research questions on GDM. Methods Using a systematic review on GDM as a starting point, we developed an eight-step process: (1) identification of research gaps, (2) feedback from the review's authors, (3) translation of gaps into researchable questions using population, intervention, comparators, outcomes, setting (PICOS) framework, (4) local institutions' stakeholders' refinement of research questions, (5) national stakeholders' use of Delphi method to develop consensus on the importance of research questions, (6) prioritization of outcomes, (7) conceptual framework, and (8) evaluation. Results We identified 15 high priority research questions for GDM. The research questions focused on medication management of GDM (e.g., various oral agents vs. insulin), delivery management for women with GDM (e.g., induction vs. expectant management), and identification of risk factors for, prevention of, and screening for type 2 diabetes in women with prior GDM. Stakeholders rated the development of chronic diseases in offspring, cesarean delivery, and birth trauma as high priority outcomes to measure in future studies. Conclusions We developed an eight-step process using a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders to identify 15 research questions of high clinical importance. Researchers, policymakers, and funders can use this list to direct research efforts and resources to the highest priority areas to improve care for women with GDM. PMID:22747422

Priorities in pediatric epilepsy research

PubMed Central

Baca, Christine B.; Loddenkemper, Tobias; Vickrey, Barbara G.; Dlugos, Dennis

2013-01-01

The Priorities in Pediatric Epilepsy Research workshop was held in the spirit of patient-centered and patient-driven mandates for developing best practices in care, particularly for epilepsy beginning under age 3 years. The workshop brought together parents, representatives of voluntary advocacy organizations, physicians, allied health professionals, researchers, and administrators to identify priority areas for pediatric epilepsy care and research including implementation and testing of interventions designed to improve care processes and outcomes. Priorities highlighted were 1) patient outcomes, especially seizure control but also behavioral, academic, and social functioning; 2) early and accurate diagnosis and optimal treatment; 3) role and involvement of parents (communication and shared decision-making); and 4) integration of school and community organizations with epilepsy care delivery. Key factors influencing pediatric epilepsy care included the child's impairments and seizure presentation, parents, providers, the health care system, and community systems. Care was represented as a sequential process from initial onset of seizures to referral for comprehensive evaluation when needed. We considered an alternative model in which comprehensive care would be utilized from onset, proactively, rather than reactively after pharmacoresistance became obvious. Barriers, including limited levels of evidence about many aspects of diagnosis and management, access to care—particularly epilepsy specialty and behavioral health care—and implementation, were identified. Progress hinges on coordinated research efforts that systematically address gaps in knowledge and overcoming barriers to access and implementation. The stakes are considerable, and the potential benefits for reduced burden of refractory epilepsy and lifelong disabilities may be enormous. PMID:23966254

1988 Delphi survey of nursing research priorities for New York State.

PubMed

Shortridge, L; Doswell, W; Evans, M E; Levin, R F; Millor, G K; Carter, E

1989-09-01

In order to inform decisions about nursing research and health care policy, the Council on Nursing Research of the New York State Nurses Association (NYSNA) conducted a Delphi survey to identify the priorities for nursing research in New York state. The Delphi technique is a method of eliciting judgements from experts for the purpose of short-term forecasting and planning. The survey was conducted by mail in three rounds during 1988. Round I required participants to identify three primary research priorities for the nursing profession. In Round II participants ranked the 37 most frequently identified categories from Round I. The highest 16 categories from Round II were ranked by participants in Round III to provide the final 10 nursing research priority categories for New York state. All members of the New York State Nurses Association holding a minimum of a master's degree in nursing were invited to participate. The response rates were: Round I, 34% (N = 872); Round II, 38% (N = 985); Round III 37% (N = 974). Of the 10 nursing research priority categories identified in the final round, 5 relate to nurses, 2 relate to nursing, and 3 relate to clients. None of the high-risk conditions or populations with whom nurses work appear in the top 10, and only 2 of these are ranked in the top 15 priority categories. These priority categories will be used by the NYSNA Council on Nursing Research to influence its future agenda and activities. They can be used by the nursing profession and others for planning, policy making, and establishing nursing research funding priorities.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

An Emergency Medicine Research Priority Setting Partnership to establish the top 10 research priorities in emergency medicine.

PubMed

Smith, Jason; Keating, Liza; Flowerdew, Lynsey; O'Brien, Rachel; McIntyre, Sam; Morley, Richard; Carley, Simon

2017-07-01

Defining research priorities in a specialty as broad as emergency medicine is a significant challenge. In order to fund and complete the most important research projects, it is imperative that we identify topics that are important to all clinicians, society and to our patients. We have undertaken a priority setting partnership to establish the most important questions facing emergency medicine. The top 10 questions reached through a consensus process are discussed. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Thrombosis in Cancer: Research Priorities Identified by a National Cancer Institute/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Strategic Working Group.

PubMed

Key, Nigel S; Khorana, Alok A; Mackman, Nigel; McCarty, Owen J T; White, Gilbert C; Francis, Charles W; McCrae, Keith R; Palumbo, Joseph S; Raskob, Gary E; Chan, Andrew T; Sood, Anil K

2016-07-01

The risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) is increased in cancer and particularly with chemotherapy, and it portends poorer survival among patients with cancer. However, many fundamental questions about cancer-associated VTE, or Trousseau syndrome, remain unanswered. This report summarizes the proceedings of a working group assembled by the NCI and NHLBI in August 2014 to explore the state of the science in cancer-associated VTE, identify clinically important research gaps, and develop consensus on priorities for future research. Representing a convergence of research priorities between the two NIH Institutes, the workshop addressed epidemiologic, basic science, clinical, and translational issues in cancer-associated VTE. Cancer Res; 76(13); 3671-5. ©2016 AACR. ©2016 American Association for Cancer Research.

Future Research Priorities for Morbidity Control of Lymphedema

PubMed Central

Narahari, S R; Aggithaya, Madhur Guruprasad; Moffatt, Christine; Ryan, T J; Keeley, Vaughan; Vijaya, B; Rajendran, P; Karalam, S B; Rajagopala, S; Kumar, N K; Bose, K S; Sushma, K V

2017-01-01

Background: Innovation in the treatment of lower extremity lymphedema has received low priority from the governments and pharmaceutical industry. Advancing lymphedema is irreversible and initiates fibrosis in the dermis, reactive changes in the epidermis and subcutis. Most medical treatments offered for lymphedema are either too demanding with a less than satisfactory response or patients have low concordance due to complex schedules. A priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to decide on the future priorities in lymphedema research. Methods: A table of abstracts following a literature search was published in workshop website. Stake holders were requested to upload their priorities. Their questions were listed, randomized, and sent to lymphologists for ranking. High ranked ten research priorities, obtained through median score, were presented in final prioritization work shop attended by invited stake holders. A free medical camp was organized during workshop to understand patients’ priorities. Results: One hundred research priorities were selected from priorities uploaded to website. Ten priorities were short listed through a peer review process involving 12 lymphologists, for final discussion. They were related to simplification of integrative treatment for lymphedema, cellular changes in lymphedema and mechanisms of its reversal, eliminating bacterial entry lesions to reduce cellulitis episodes, exploring evidence for therapies in traditional medicine, improving patient concordance to compression therapy, epidemiology of lymphatic filariasis (LF), and economic benefit of integrative treatments of lymphedema. Conclusion: A robust research priority setting process, organized as described in James Lind Alliance guidebook, identified seven priority areas to achieve effective morbidity control of lymphedema including LF. All stake holders including Department of Health Research, Government of India, participated in the PSP. PMID:28216723

International Occupational Therapy Research Priorities.

PubMed

Mackenzie, Lynette; Coppola, Susan; Alvarez, Liliana; Cibule, Lolita; Maltsev, Sergey; Loh, Siew Yim; Mlambo, Tecla; Ikiugu, Moses N; Pihlar, Zdenka; Sriphetcharawut, Sarinya; Baptiste, Sue; Ledgerd, Richard

2017-04-01

Occupational therapy is a global profession represented by the World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT). International research priorities are needed for strategic guidance on global occupational therapy practice. The objective of this study was to develop international research priorities to reflect global occupational therapy practice. A Delphi study using three rounds of electronic surveys, distributed to WFOT member organizations and WFOT accredited universities, was conducted. Data were analyzed after each round, and priorities were presented for rating and ranking in order of importance. Forty-six (53%) out of 87 WFOT member countries participated in the Delphi process. Eight research priorities were confirmed by the final electronic survey round. Differences were observed in rankings given by member organizations and university respondents. Despite attrition at Round 3, the final research priorities will help to focus research efforts in occupational therapy globally. Follow-up research is needed to determine how the research priorities are being adopted internationally.

Clinical Research Priorities in Adult Congenital Heart Disease

PubMed Central

Cotts, Timothy; Khairy, Paul; Opotowsky, Alexander R.; John, Anitha S.; Valente, Anne Marie; Zaidi, Ali N.; Cook, Stephen C.; Aboulhosn, Jamil; Ting, Jennifer Grando; Gurvitz, Michelle; Landzberg, Michael J.; Verstappen, Amy; Kay, Joseph; Earing, Michael; Franklin, Wayne; Kogon, Brian; Broberg, Craig S.

2014-01-01

Background Adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) clinicians are hampered by the paucity of data to inform clinical decision-making. The objective of this study was to identify priorities for clinical research in ACHD. Methods A list of 45 research questions was developed by the Alliance for Adult Research in Congenital Cardiology (AARCC), compiled into a survey, and administered to ACHD providers. Patient input was sought via the Adult Congenital Heart Association at community meetings and online forums. The 25 top questions were sent to ACHD providers worldwide via an online survey. Each question was ranked based on perceived priority and weighted based on time spent in ACHD care. The top 10 topics identified are presented and discussed. Results The final online survey yielded 139 responses. Top priority questions related to tetralogy of Fallot (timing of pulmonary valve replacement and criteria for primary prevention ICDs), patients with systemic right ventricles (determining the optimal echocardiographic techniques for measuring right ventricular function, and indications for tricuspid valve replacement and primary prevention ICDs), and single ventricle/Fontan patients (role of pulmonary vasodilators, optimal anticoagulation, medical therapy for preservation of ventricular function, treatment for protein losing enteropathy). In addition, establishing criteria to refer ACHD patients for cardiac transplantation was deemed a priority. Conclusions The ACHD field is in need of prospective research to address fundamental clinical questions. It is hoped that this methodical consultation process will inform researchers and funding organizations about clinical research topics deemed to be of high priority. PMID:24411207

Clinical research priorities in adult congenital heart disease.

PubMed

Cotts, Timothy; Khairy, Paul; Opotowsky, Alexander R; John, Anitha S; Valente, Anne Marie; Zaidi, Ali N; Cook, Stephen C; Aboulhosn, Jamil; Ting, Jennifer Grando; Gurvitz, Michelle; Landzberg, Michael J; Verstappen, Amy; Kay, Joseph; Earing, Michael; Franklin, Wayne; Kogon, Brian; Broberg, Craig S

2014-02-15

Adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) clinicians are hampered by the paucity of data to inform clinical decision-making. The objective of this study was to identify priorities for clinical research in ACHD. A list of 45 research questions was developed by the Alliance for Adult Research in Congenital Cardiology (AARCC), compiled into a survey, and administered to ACHD providers. Patient input was sought via the Adult Congenital Heart Association at community meetings and online forums. The 25 top questions were sent to ACHD providers worldwide via an online survey. Each question was ranked based on perceived priority and weighted based on time spent in ACHD care. The top 10 topics identified are presented and discussed. The final online survey yielded 139 responses. Top priority questions related to tetralogy of Fallot (timing of pulmonary valve replacement and criteria for primary prevention ICDs), patients with systemic right ventricles (determining the optimal echocardiographic techniques for measuring right ventricular function, and indications for tricuspid valve replacement and primary prevention ICDs), and single ventricle/Fontan patients (role of pulmonary vasodilators, optimal anticoagulation, medical therapy for preservation of ventricular function, treatment for protein losing enteropathy). In addition, establishing criteria to refer ACHD patients for cardiac transplantation was deemed a priority. The ACHD field is in need of prospective research to address fundamental clinical questions. It is hoped that this methodical consultation process will inform researchers and funding organizations about clinical research topics deemed to be of high priority. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Public priorities for joint pain research: results from a general population survey

PubMed Central

Carter, Pam; Ong, Bie Nio; Bedson, John; Jordan, Kelvin P.; Jinks, Clare

2012-01-01

Objective. We aimed to identify the priorities for joint pain research from a large general population survey and identify characteristics associated with these priorities. Methods. A question about research priorities was developed in collaboration with the Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre’s Research Users’ Group. The question was embedded in a postal survey to an existing cohort of adults with self-reported joint pain, aged ≥56 years, in North Staffordshire. Respondents were asked to rank their top three priorities for research. Factor mixture modelling was used to determine subgroups of priorities. Results. In all, 1756 (88%) people responded to the survey. Of these, 1356 (77%) gave three priorities for research. Keeping active was rated the top priority by 38%, followed by research around joint replacement (9%) and diet/weight loss (9%). Two clusters of people were identified: 62% preferred lifestyle/self-management topics (e.g. keeping active, weight loss) and 38% preferred medical intervention topics (e.g. joint replacement, tablets). Those who preferred the medical options tended to be older and have hip or foot pain. Conclusion. This study has provided population data on priorities for joint pain research expressed by a large cohort of older people who report joint pain. The most popular topics for research were linked to lifestyle and self-management opportunities. Pharmaceutical and invasive interventions, despite being common topics of research, are of less importance to these respondents than non-medical topics. Specific research questions will be generated from this study with collaboration of the patient’s group. PMID:22886341

Vision-related research priorities and how to finance them.

PubMed

McCarty, Catherine A

2012-01-01

A number of organizations have employed a consultative process with the vision community to engage relevant parties in identifying needs and opportunities for vision research. The National Eye Institute in the US and the European Commission are currently undergoing consultation to develop priorities for vision research. Once these priorities have been established, the challenge will be to identify the resources to advance these research agendas. Success rates for Federal funding for research have decreased recently in the USA, UK, and Australia. Researchers should consider various potential funding sources for their research. The universal consideration for funding is that the reason for funding should align with the mission of the funding organization. In addition to Federal research organizations that fund investigator-initiated research, other potential funding sources include nongovernmental organizations, for-profit companies, individual philanthropy, and service organizations. In addition to aligning with organizational funding priorities, researchers need to consider turn-around time and total funds available including whether an organization will cover institutional indirect costs. Websites are useful tools to find information about organizations that fund research, including grant deadlines. Collaboration is encouraged.

Defining Priorities for Future Research: Results of the UK Kidney Transplant Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Metcalfe, Leanne; O’Donoghue, Katriona; Ball, Simon T.; Beale, Angela; Beale, William; Hilton, Rachel; Hodkinson, Keith; Lipkin, Graham W.; Loud, Fiona; Marson, Lorna P.; Morris, Peter J.

2016-01-01

Background It has been suggested that the research priorities of those funding and performing research in transplantation may differ from those of end service users such as patients, carers and healthcare professionals involved in day-to-day care. The Kidney Transplant Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established with the aim of involving all stakeholders in prioritising future research in the field. Methods The PSP methodology is as outlined by the James Lind Alliance. An initial survey collected unanswered research questions from patients, carers and clinicians. Duplicate and out-of-scope topics were excluded and the existing literature searched to identify topics answered by current evidence. An interim prioritisation survey asked patients and professionals to score the importance of the remaining questions to create a ranked long-list. These were considered at a final consensus workshop using a modified nominal group technique to agree a final top ten. Results The initial survey identified 497 questions from 183 respondents, covering all aspects of transplantation from assessment through to long-term follow-up. These were grouped into 90 unanswered “indicative” questions. The interim prioritisation survey received 256 responses (34.8% patients/carers, 10.9% donors and 54.3% professionals), resulting in a ranked list of 25 questions that were considered during the final workshop. Participants agreed a top ten priorities for future research that included optimisation of immunosuppression (improved monitoring, choice of regimen, personalisation), prevention of sensitisation and transplanting the sensitised patient, management of antibody-mediated rejection, long-term risks to live donors, methods of organ preservation, induction of tolerance and bioengineering of organs. There was evidence that patient and carer involvement had a significant impact on shaping the final priorities. Conclusions The final list of priorities relates to all stages of the

Defining Priorities for Future Research: Results of the UK Kidney Transplant Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Knight, Simon R; Metcalfe, Leanne; O'Donoghue, Katriona; Ball, Simon T; Beale, Angela; Beale, William; Hilton, Rachel; Hodkinson, Keith; Lipkin, Graham W; Loud, Fiona; Marson, Lorna P; Morris, Peter J

2016-01-01

It has been suggested that the research priorities of those funding and performing research in transplantation may differ from those of end service users such as patients, carers and healthcare professionals involved in day-to-day care. The Kidney Transplant Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established with the aim of involving all stakeholders in prioritising future research in the field. The PSP methodology is as outlined by the James Lind Alliance. An initial survey collected unanswered research questions from patients, carers and clinicians. Duplicate and out-of-scope topics were excluded and the existing literature searched to identify topics answered by current evidence. An interim prioritisation survey asked patients and professionals to score the importance of the remaining questions to create a ranked long-list. These were considered at a final consensus workshop using a modified nominal group technique to agree a final top ten. The initial survey identified 497 questions from 183 respondents, covering all aspects of transplantation from assessment through to long-term follow-up. These were grouped into 90 unanswered "indicative" questions. The interim prioritisation survey received 256 responses (34.8% patients/carers, 10.9% donors and 54.3% professionals), resulting in a ranked list of 25 questions that were considered during the final workshop. Participants agreed a top ten priorities for future research that included optimisation of immunosuppression (improved monitoring, choice of regimen, personalisation), prevention of sensitisation and transplanting the sensitised patient, management of antibody-mediated rejection, long-term risks to live donors, methods of organ preservation, induction of tolerance and bioengineering of organs. There was evidence that patient and carer involvement had a significant impact on shaping the final priorities. The final list of priorities relates to all stages of the transplant process, including access to

Global Health and Emergency Care: Defining Clinical Research Priorities.

PubMed

Hansoti, Bhakti; Aluisio, Adam R; Barry, Meagan A; Davey, Kevin; Lentz, Brian A; Modi, Payal; Newberry, Jennifer A; Patel, Melissa H; Smith, Tricia A; Vinograd, Alexandra M; Levine, Adam C

2017-06-01

Despite recent strides in the development of global emergency medicine (EM), the field continues to lag in applying a scientific approach to identifying critical knowledge gaps and advancing evidence-based solutions to clinical and public health problems seen in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. Here, progress on the global EM research agenda created at the 2013 Academic Emergency Medicine Global Health and Emergency Care Consensus Conference is evaluated and critical areas for future development in emergency care research internationally are identified. A retrospective review of all studies compiled in the Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) database from 2013 through 2015 was conducted. Articles were categorized and analyzed using descriptive quantitative measures and structured data matrices. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2016 Annual Meeting then further conceptualized and defined global EM research priorities utilizing consensus-based decision making. Research trends in global EM research published between 2013 and 2015 show a predominance of observational studies relative to interventional or descriptive studies, with the majority of research conducted in the inpatient setting in comparison to the ED or prehospital setting. Studies on communicable diseases and injury were the most prevalent, with a relative dearth of research on chronic noncommunicable diseases. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group identified conceptual frameworks to define high-impact research priorities, including the traditional approach of using global burden of disease to define priorities and the impact of EM on individual clinical care and public health opportunities. EM research is also described through a population lens approach, including gender, pediatrics, and migrant and refugee health. Despite recent strides in global EM research and

Implementing priority setting frameworks: Insights from leading researchers.

PubMed

Angell, Blake; Pares, Jennie; Mooney, Gavin

2016-12-01

In spite of a substantial literature developing frameworks for policymakers to use in resource allocation decisions in healthcare, there remains limited published work reporting on the implementation or evaluation of such frameworks in practice. This paper presents findings of a targeted survey of 18 leading researchers around the implementation and evaluation of priority-setting exercises. Approximately one third of respondents knew of situations where recommendations of priority-setting exercises had been implemented, one third knew that recommendations had not been implemented and the final third responded that they did not know whether recommendations had been adopted. The lack of evidence linking the implementation of priority-setting recommendations to equity and efficiency outcomes was highlighted by all respondents. Features identified as facilitating successful implementation of priority-setting recommendations included having a climate ready to accept priority-setting, good leadership or a 'champion' for the priority-setting process and having a health economist to guide the process. Successful disinvestment was very uncommon in the experience of the researchers surveyed. Recommendations emerging from Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis exercises appeared to be more widely implemented than those coming from alternative processes. Identifying if the process was repeated following the initial process was suggested as a means to measure success. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Research Priorities in Sudden Unexpected Infant Death: An International Consensus.

PubMed

Hauck, Fern R; McEntire, Betty L; Raven, Leanne K; Bates, Francine L; Lyus, Lucy A; Willett, Alexis M; Blair, Peter S

2017-07-27

Despite the success of safe sleep campaigns and the progress in understanding risk factors, the rate of reduction in the cases of sudden infant death syndrome has now slowed and it remains a leading cause of postneonatal mortality in many developed countries. Strategic action is needed to tackle this problem and it is now vital to identify how the sudden infant death research community may best target its efforts. The Global Action and Prioritization of Sudden Infant Death Project was an international consensus process that aimed to define and direct future research by investigating the priorities of expert and lay members of the sudden unexpected infant death (SUID) community across countries. The aim was to identify which areas of research should be prioritized to reduce the number of SUID deaths globally. Scientific researchers, clinicians, counselors, educators, and SUID parents from 25 countries took part across 2 online surveys to identify potential research priorities. Workshops subsequently took place in the United Kingdom, United States, and Australia to reach consensus and 10 priority areas for research were established. Three main themes among the priorities emerged: (1) a better understanding of mechanisms underlying SUID, (2) ensuring best practice in data collection, management and sharing, and (3) a better understanding of target populations and more effective communication of risk. SUID is a global problem and this project provides the international SUID community with a list of shared research priorities to more effectively work toward explaining and reducing the number of sudden infant deaths. Copyright © 2017 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Vision-related research priorities and how to finance them

PubMed Central

McCarty, Catherine A

2012-01-01

A number of organizations have employed a consultative process with the vision community to engage relevant parties in identifying needs and opportunities for vision research. The National Eye Institute in the US and the European Commission are currently undergoing consultation to develop priorities for vision research. Once these priorities have been established, the challenge will be to identify the resources to advance these research agendas. Success rates for Federal funding for research have decreased recently in the USA, UK, and Australia. Researchers should consider various potential funding sources for their research. The universal consideration for funding is that the reason for funding should align with the mission of the funding organization. In addition to Federal research organizations that fund investigator-initiated research, other potential funding sources include nongovernmental organizations, for-profit companies, individual philanthropy, and service organizations. In addition to aligning with organizational funding priorities, researchers need to consider turn-around time and total funds available including whether an organization will cover institutional indirect costs. Websites are useful tools to find information about organizations that fund research, including grant deadlines. Collaboration is encouraged. PMID:22944760

Systematic reviews addressing identified health policy priorities in Eastern Mediterranean countries: a situational analysis.

PubMed

El-Jardali, Fadi; Akl, Elie A; Karroum, Lama Bou; Kdouh, Ola; Akik, Chaza; Fadlallah, Racha; Hammoud, Rawan

2014-08-20

Systematic reviews can offer policymakers and stakeholders concise, transparent, and relevant evidence pertaining to pressing policy priorities to help inform the decision-making process. The production and the use of systematic reviews are specifically limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities in the region is still unknown. This situational analysis exercise aims at assessing the extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities identified by policymakers and stakeholders in Eastern Mediterranean region countries. It also provides an overview about the state of systematic review production in the region and identifies knowledge gaps. We conducted a systematic search of the Health System Evidence database to identify published systematic reviews on policy-relevant priorities pertaining to the following themes: human resources for health, health financing, the role of the non-state sector, and access to medicine. Priorities were identified from two priority-setting exercises conducted in the region. We described the distribution of these systematic reviews across themes, sub-themes, authors' affiliations, and countries where included primary studies were conducted. Out of the 1,045 systematic reviews identified in Health System Evidence on selected themes, a total of 200 systematic reviews (19.1%) addressed the priorities from the Eastern Mediterranean region. The theme with the largest number of systematic reviews included was human resources for health (115) followed by health financing (33), access to medicine (27), and role of the non-state sector (25). Authors based in the region produced only three systematic reviews addressing regional priorities (1.5%). Furthermore, no systematic review focused on the Eastern Mediterranean region. Primary studies from the region had limited contribution to systematic reviews; 17 systematic reviews (8.5%) included primary

Systematic reviews addressing identified health policy priorities in Eastern Mediterranean countries: a situational analysis

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Systematic reviews can offer policymakers and stakeholders concise, transparent, and relevant evidence pertaining to pressing policy priorities to help inform the decision-making process. The production and the use of systematic reviews are specifically limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities in the region is still unknown. This situational analysis exercise aims at assessing the extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities identified by policymakers and stakeholders in Eastern Mediterranean region countries. It also provides an overview about the state of systematic review production in the region and identifies knowledge gaps. Methods We conducted a systematic search of the Health System Evidence database to identify published systematic reviews on policy-relevant priorities pertaining to the following themes: human resources for health, health financing, the role of the non-state sector, and access to medicine. Priorities were identified from two priority-setting exercises conducted in the region. We described the distribution of these systematic reviews across themes, sub-themes, authors’ affiliations, and countries where included primary studies were conducted. Results Out of the 1,045 systematic reviews identified in Health System Evidence on selected themes, a total of 200 systematic reviews (19.1%) addressed the priorities from the Eastern Mediterranean region. The theme with the largest number of systematic reviews included was human resources for health (115) followed by health financing (33), access to medicine (27), and role of the non-state sector (25). Authors based in the region produced only three systematic reviews addressing regional priorities (1.5%). Furthermore, no systematic review focused on the Eastern Mediterranean region. Primary studies from the region had limited contribution to systematic reviews; 17 systematic reviews

76 FR 38134 - Final Priorities; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program-Disability...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-29

...-identified research designs to generate reliable and valid findings. Changes: None. Final Priorities Priority... DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Final Priorities; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program--Disability Rehabilitation Research Projects, etc. AGENCY: Office of Special Education and...

Final priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Final priority.

PubMed

2014-06-05

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we announce a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to Enhance Independence in Daily Living for Adults with Cognitive Impairments. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on an area of national need. We intend the priority to contribute to improved outcomes related to independence in daily activities in the home, community, or workplace setting for adults with cognitive impairments.

Final priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Final priority.

PubMed

2014-07-09

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we announce a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Improving the Accessibility, Usability, and Performance of Technology for Individuals who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on an area of national need. We intend the priority to contribute to improving the accessibility, usability, and performance of technology for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Setting priorities for research in medical nutrition education: an international approach.

PubMed

Ball, Lauren; Barnes, Katelyn; Laur, Celia; Crowley, Jennifer; Ray, Sumantra

2016-12-14

To identify the research priorities for medical nutrition education worldwide. A 5-step stakeholder engagement process based on methodological guidelines for identifying research priorities in health. 277 individuals were identified as representatives for 30 different stakeholder organisations across 86 countries. The stakeholder organisations represented the views of medical educators, medical students, doctors, patients and researchers in medical education. Each stakeholder representative was asked to provide up to three research questions that should be deemed as a priority for medical nutrition education. Research questions were critically appraised for answerability, sustainability, effectiveness, potential for translation and potential to impact on disease burden. A blinded scoring system was used to rank the appraised questions, with higher scores indicating higher priority (range of scores possible 36-108). 37 submissions were received, of which 25 were unique research questions. Submitted questions received a range of scores from 62 to 106 points. The highest scoring questions focused on (1) increasing the confidence of medical students and doctors in providing nutrition care to patients, (2) clarifying the essential nutrition skills doctors should acquire, (3) understanding the effectiveness of doctors at influencing dietary behaviours and (4) improving medical students' attitudes towards the importance of nutrition. These research questions can be used to ensure future projects in medical nutrition education directly align with the needs and preferences of research stakeholders. Funders should consider these priorities in their commissioning of research. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Setting research priorities across science, technology, and health sectors: the Tanzania experience.

PubMed

de Haan, Sylvia; Kingamkono, Rose; Tindamanyire, Neema; Mshinda, Hassan; Makandi, Harun; Tibazarwa, Flora; Kubata, Bruno; Montorzi, Gabriela

2015-03-12

Identifying research priorities is key to innovation and economic growth, since it informs decision makers on effectively targeting issues that have the greatest potential public benefit. As such, the process of setting research priorities is of pivotal importance for favouring the science, technology, and innovation (STI)-driven development of low- and middle-income countries. We report herein on a major cross-sectoral nationwide research priority setting effort recently carried out in Tanzania by the Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology (COSTECH) in partnership with the Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) and the NEPAD Agency. The first of its type in the country, the process brought together stakeholders from 42 sub-sectors in science, technology, and health. The cross-sectoral research priority setting process consisted of a 'training-of-trainers' workshop, a demonstration workshop, and seven priority setting workshops delivered to representatives from public and private research and development institutions, universities, non-governmental organizations, and other agencies affiliated to COSTECH. The workshops resulted in ranked listings of research priorities for each sub-sector, totalling approximately 800 priorities. This large number was significantly reduced by an expert panel in order to build a manageable instrument aligned to national development plans that could be used to guide research investments. The Tanzania experience is an instructive example of the challenges and issues to be faced in when attempting to identify research priority areas and setting an STI research agenda in low- and middle-income countries. As countries increase their investment in research, it is essential to increase investment in research management and governance as well, a key and much needed capacity for countries to make proper use of research investments.

Impact of legal regulations and administrative policies on persons with SCI: identifying potential research priorities through expert interviews.

PubMed

Trezzini, Bruno; Phillips, Barbara

2014-01-01

To identify research gaps and potential research priorities regarding the impact that legal regulations and administrative policies might have on people with spinal cord injury (SCI) living in Switzerland. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 healthcare professionals working for or being associated with the largest SCI clinic in Switzerland. The transcribed interviews were content analyzed, involving qualitative description, and thematic analysis techniques. Four interrelated clusters of issues were corroborated: (1) social insurance, (2) caregiving, (3) work integration, and (4) aging. In addition, two overarching themes were identified: (1) fairness considerations and (2) unavailability of systematic empirical evidence. Work capacity assessment and family caregiving were deemed to be the most pressing research priority areas. Legal frameworks do play both a direct and an indirect role in the lives of people with SCI in Switzerland. This is particularly true with regard to various issues related to the social insurance system, such as family caregiving and work capacity assessment. The salience of these topics is closely related to major sociodemographic and political driving forces, i.e. aging and social insurance reforms. Research directly involving people with SCI is needed to further substantiate and refine the findings of this study. When dealing with issues related to work reintegration, aging, social insurance, and caregiving, rehabilitation professionals should take existing legal frameworks into account. Eligibility criteria for disability benefits may influence the therapy motivation of rehabilitation clients.

Setting and meeting priorities in Indigenous health research in Australia and its application in the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal health.

PubMed

Monk, Johanna M; Rowley, Kevin G; Anderson, Ian Ps

2009-11-20

Priority setting is about making decisions. Key issues faced during priority setting processes include identifying who makes these decisions, who sets the criteria, and who benefits. The paper reviews the literature and history around priority setting in research, particularly in Aboriginal health research. We explore these issues through a case study of the Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health (CRCAH)'s experience in setting and meeting priorities.Historically, researchers have made decisions about what research gets done. Pressures of growing competition for research funds and an increased public interest in research have led to demands that appropriate consultation with stakeholders is conducted and that research is of benefit to the wider society. Within Australian Aboriginal communities, these demands extend to Aboriginal control of research to ensure that Aboriginal priorities are met.In response to these demands, research priorities are usually agreed in consultation with stakeholders at an institutional level and researchers are asked to develop relevant proposals at a project level. The CRCAH's experience in funding rounds was that scientific merit was given more weight than stakeholders' priorities and did not necessarily result in research that met these priorities. After reviewing these processes in 2004, the CRCAH identified a new facilitated development approach. In this revised approach, the setting of institutional priorities is integrated with the development of projects in a way that ensures the research reflects stakeholder priorities.This process puts emphasis on identifying projects that reflect priorities prior to developing the quality of the research, rather than assessing the relevance to priorities and quality concurrently. Part of the CRCAH approach is the employment of Program Managers who ensure that stakeholder priorities are met in the development of research projects. This has enabled researchers and stakeholders to come

Research priorities for specialized nursing practice in the United Arab Emirates.

PubMed

Al-Yateem, N; Al-Tamimi, M; Brenner, M; Altawil, H; Ahmad, A; Brownie, S

2017-08-25

Globally, nurses are undertaking expanded and more specialized roles in healthcare planning and service delivery in response to changing patterns and levels of health service demand. This means the nursing profession is increasingly considered as leaders in health service policy, research and practice. The United Arab Emirates has strengthened nursing governance and practice by establishing a Nursing and Midwifery Council and increasing the activity of nursing specialization, service leadership and research. This study aimed to identify clinically relevant research priorities to facilitate nursing contributions to evidence-based care and strengthening health services in the country. A two-stage Delphi study design was used. The first round involved 783 participants. The second round involved 1116 participants, as more clinical settings were accessed. In total, 58 research priorities across a variety of nursing specialties (paediatrics, emergency care, intensive care, labour and maternity care, operating theatre and long-term care) were identified as highly important. These identified priorities will guide a more informed programme of research in each nursing specialty, with the aim of strengthening the evidence base to improving outcomes for patients and their families in the United Arab Emirates. The findings provide guidance on key areas for nurses to focus research contributions to enhance evidence-based care and strengthen health systems. The identified priorities may also guide researchers in academic institutions to conduct research informed by current, clinically relevant issues. The findings may help inform funders and policymakers to support allocation of funding to research that has potential to contribute to enhancing nursing care in specialist areas. © 2017 International Council of Nurses.

The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise.

PubMed

Tudur Smith, Catrin; Hickey, Helen; Clarke, Mike; Blazeby, Jane; Williamson, Paula

2014-01-23

Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust. An on-line Delphi survey of 48 UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken. During round one, CTU Directors were asked to identify important topics that require methodological research. During round two, their opinion about the level of importance of each topic was recorded, and during round three, they were asked to review the group's average opinion and revise their previous opinion if appropriate. Direct reminders were sent to maximise the number of responses at each round. Results are summarised using descriptive methods. Forty one (85%) CTU Directors responded to at least one round of the Delphi process: 25 (52%) responded in round one, 32 (67%) responded in round two, 24 (50%) responded in round three. There were only 12 (25%) who responded to all three rounds and 18 (38%) who responded to both rounds two and three. Consensus was achieved amongst CTU Directors that the top three priorities for trials methodological research were 'Research into methods to boost recruitment in trials' (considered the highest priority), 'Methods to minimise attrition' and 'Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure'. Fifty other topics were included in the list of priorities and consensus was reached that two topics, 'Radiotherapy study designs' and 'Low carbon trials', were not priorities. This priority setting exercise has identified the research topics felt to be most important to the key stakeholder group of Directors of UKCRC registered CTUs. The use of robust methodology to identify these priorities will help ensure that this work informs the trials methodological research agenda, with a focus on topics that will have most impact and relevance.

Research priorities of international sporting federations and the IOC research centres

PubMed Central

Talpey, Scott; Bradshaw, Ashley; Soligard, Torbjorn; Engebretsen, Lars

2016-01-01

Background/aim To be fully effective, the prevention of injury in sport and promotion of athlete's health needs to be both targeted and underpinned by scientific evidence. This study aimed to identify the research priorities of International Sporting Federation (ISFs) compared to the current research focus of the International Olympic Committee Research Centres (IOC-RCs). Methods Online survey of ISF Medical Chairpersons (n=22, 69% response) and IOC-RC Directors (n=7, 78% response). Open-ended responses relating to injury/illness priorities and specific athlete targets were thematically coded. Ratings were given of the need for different research types according to the Translating Research into Injury Prevention Practice (TRIPP) Framework stages. Results are presented as the frequency of ISFs and IOC-RCs separately. Results Both ISFs and IOC-RFs prioritised research into concussion (27%, 72%, respectively), competitive overuse (23%, 43%) and youth (41%, 43%). The ISFs also ranked catastrophic injuries (14%), environmental factors (18%), elite athletes (18%) and Paralympic athletes (14%) as important. The IOC-RCs gave higher priority to preventing respiratory illness (43%), long-term health consequences of injury (43%) and recreational athletes (43%). There was a trend towards ISFs valuing TRIPP stage 5/6 research more highly and for the IOC-RCs to value TRIPP stage 1/2 research. Conclusions There are clear opportunities to better link the priorities and actions of the ISFs and IOC-RCs, to ensure more effective practice-policy-research partnerships for the benefit of all athletes. Setting a mutually-agreed research agenda will require further active engagement between researchers and broader ISF representatives. PMID:27900197

Establishing health systems financing research priorities in developing countries using a participatory methodology.

PubMed

Ranson, Kent; Law, Tyler J; Bennett, Sara

2010-06-01

Donor funding for health systems financing (HSF) research is inadequate and often poorly aligned with national priorities. This study aimed to generate consensus about a core set of research issues that urgently require attention in order to facilitate policy development. There were three key inputs into the priority setting process: key-informant interviews with health policy makers, researchers, community and civil society representatives across twenty-four low- and middle-income countries in four regions; an overview of relevant reviews to identify research completed to date; and inputs from 12 key informants (largely researchers) at a consultative workshop. Nineteen priority research questions emerged from key-informant interviews. The overview of reviews was instructive in showing which health financing topics have had comparatively little written about them, despite being identified as important by key informants. The questions ranked as most important at the consultative workshop were: It is hoped that this work on HSF research priorities will complement calls for increased health systems research and evaluation by providing specific suggestions as to where new and existing research resources can best be invested. The list of high priority HSF research questions is being communicated to research funders and researchers in order to seek to influence global patterns of HSF research funding and activity. A "bottom up" approach to setting global research priorities such as that employed here should ensure that priorities are more sensitive to user needs. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Setting research priorities to improve the health of children and young people with neurodisability: a British Academy of Childhood Disability-James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Morris, Christopher; Simkiss, Doug; Busk, Mary; Morris, Maureen; Allard, Amanda; Denness, Jacob; Janssens, Astrid; Stimson, Anna; Coghill, Joanna; Robinson, Kelly; Fenton, Mark; Cowan, Katherine

2015-01-01

Objectives To engage young people, parent carers and clinicians in a systematic process to identify and prioritise research questions regarding ways to improve the health and well-being of children and young people with neurodisability. Design British Academy of Childhood Disability (BACD)-James Lind Alliance research priority setting partnership bringing together patients, carers and clinicians as equal stakeholders. Setting UK health service and community. Methods The BACD Strategic Research Group formed the partnership. A Steering Group was established; charity and professional partner organisations were recruited. Suggestions were gathered in an open survey and from research recommendations for statutory guidance. Items were aggregated to formulate indicative research questions and verified as uncertainties from research evidence. An interim survey was used to rank the questions to shortlist topics. A mixed group of stakeholders discussed the top 25 questions at the final priority setting workshop agreeing a final rank order and the top 10 research priorities. Participants Partner organisations were 13 charities and 8 professional societies. 369 people submitted suggestions (40% non-clinicians). 76 people participated in the interim prioritisation (26 parents, 1 young person, 10 charity representatives, 39 clinicians); 22 took part in the final workshop (3 young people, 7 parents, 3 charity representatives, 9 professionals). Results The top three research priorities related to (1) establishing the optimal frequency and intensity (dose) for mainstream therapies, (2) means for selecting and encouraging use of communication strategies and (3) ways to improve children's attitudes towards disability. The top 10 included evaluating interventions to promote mobility, self-efficacy, mental health, continence, physical fitness, educational inclusion and reduce impacts of sleep disturbance. Conclusions The methodology provided a systematic and transparent process to

Engaging Patients and Clinicians in Establishing Research Priorities for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

PubMed

Rees, Sandra E; Chadha, Rati; Donovan, Lois E; Guitard, Adrienne L T; Koppula, Sudha; Laupacis, Andreas; Simpson, Sara; Johnson, Jeffrey A

2017-04-01

We involved patients and clinicians in Alberta, Canada, to establish research priorities in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), using an approach based on a model proposed by the James Lind Alliance (JLA). We adapted the 4-step JLA process to engage women with GDM and clinicians to identify uncertainties about the management of GDM. Uncertainties were identified through a survey and a review of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Uncertainties were short-listed by a steering committee, followed by a 1-day facilitated workshop using a nominal group format and involving a similar number of patients and clinicians, who identified the top 10 research priorities. Across the various survey formats, 75 individuals submitted 389 uncertainties, the majority (44; 59%) coming from patients. We removed 9 questions as being out of scope or unclear, and 41 were identified on a review of CPG, resulting in a total of 421 uncertainties. After the priority setting process, the final top 10 research priorities included questions about a simpler, more accurate and convenient screening test; risk factors for GDM; improving postpartum diabetes screening; the impact of GDM on the future health of the children; lifestyle challenges and mental health issues; safety, effectiveness and/or impact of diet and/or medication treatments; appropriate timing for delivery; and how care is provided, organized or communicated. These top 10 research priorities were informed through a comprehensive and transparent process involving women who have experienced GDM as well as clinicians, and they may be regarded as research priorities for GDM. Copyright © 2016 Canadian Diabetes Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Final priorities; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Final priorities.

PubMed

2013-06-11

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces priorities under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, we announce priorities for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Rehabilitation Strategies, Techniques, and Interventions (Priority 1), Information and Communication Technologies Access (Priority 2), Individual Mobility and Manipulation (Priority 3), and Physical Access and Transportation (Priority 4). The Assistant Secretary may use one or more of these priorities for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2013 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on areas of national need. We intend these priorities to improve community living and participation, health and function, and employment outcomes of individuals with disabilities.

Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership - the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study.

PubMed

Healy, Patricia; Galvin, Sandra; Williamson, Paula R; Treweek, Shaun; Whiting, Caroline; Maeso, Beccy; Bray, Christopher; Brocklehurst, Peter; Moloney, Mary Clarke; Douiri, Abdel; Gamble, Carrol; Gardner, Heidi R; Mitchell, Derick; Stewart, Derek; Jordan, Joan; O'Donnell, Martin; Clarke, Mike; Pavitt, Sue H; Guegan, Eleanor Woodford; Blatch-Jones, Amanda; Smith, Valerie; Reay, Hannah; Devane, Declan

2018-03-01

Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology. This partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop. A total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was "How can randomised trials become

Health technology assessment: research trends and future priorities in Europe.

PubMed

Nielsen, Camilla Palmhøj; Funch, Tina Maria; Kristensen, Finn Børlum

2011-07-01

To provide an overview of health services research related to health technology assessment (HTA) and to identify research priorities from a European perspective. Several methods were used: systematic review of articles indexed with the MeSH term 'technology assessment' in PubMed from February 1999-2009; online survey among experts; and conference workshop discussions. Research activity in HTA varies considerably across Europe. The research was categorised into six areas: (1) the breadth of analysis in HTA (such as economic, organizational and social aspects); (2) HTA products developed to meet the needs of policy-makers (such as horizon scanning, mini-HTA, and core HTA); (3) handling life-cycle perspectives in relation to technologies; (4) topics that challenge existing methods and for which HTA should be developed to address the themes more comprehensively (such as public health interventions and organizational interventions); (5) development of HTA capacity and programmes; and (6) links between policy and HTA. An online survey showed that the three areas that were given priority were the relationship between HTA and policy-making (71%), the impact of HTA (62%) and incorporating patient aspects in HTA (50%). Policy-makers highlighted HTA and innovation processes as their main research priority (42%). Areas that the systematic review identified as future priorities include issues within the six existing research areas such as disinvestment, developing evidence for new technologies, assessing the wider effects of technology use, and determining how HTA affects decision-making. In addition, relative effectiveness and individualized treatments are areas of growing interest. The research priorities identified are important for obtaining high quality and cost-effective health care in Europe. Managing the introduction, use and phasing out of technologies challenges health services throughout Europe, and these processes need to be improved to successfully manage future

Research Priorities in Mobile Learning: An International Delphi Study

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hsu, Yu-Chang; Ching, Yu-Hui; Snelson, Chareen

2014-01-01

Along with advancing mobile technologies and proliferating mobile devices and applications, mobile learning research has gained great momentum in recent years. While there have been review articles summarizing past research, studies identifying mobile learning research priorities based on experts' latest insights have been lacking. This study…

Research priorities by professional background - A detailed analysis of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Arulkumaran, Nishkantha; Reay, Hannah; Brett, Stephen J

2016-05-01

The Intensive Care Foundation, in partnership with the James Lind Alliance, has supported a national project to identify and prioritise unanswered questions about adult intensive care that are important to people who have been critically ill, their families, and the health professionals who care for them. We conducted a secondary analysis to explore differences in priorities determined by different respondent groups in order to identify different groups' perceptions of gaps in knowledge. There were two surveys conducted as part of the original project. Survey 1 comprised a single open question to identify important research topics; survey 2 aimed to prioritise these topics using a 10-point Likert scale. In survey 1, despite clear differences in suggestions amongst the respondent groups, themes of comfort/communication and post-ICU rehabilitation were the within the top 2 suggestions across all groups. Patients and relatives suggested research topics to which they could easily relate, whereas there was a greater breadth of suggestions from clinicians. In survey 2, the number of research priorities that received a mode score of 10 varied from 1 to 36. Patients scored 36 out of the 37 topics with a mode score of 10. All other groups scored topics with more discrimination, with the number of topics with a mode score of 10 ranging from 1 to 20. Differences in the proportions of the representative groups are therefore unlikely to have translated to an impartial conclusion. Clinicians, patients, and family members have jointly identified the research priorities for UK ICM practice.

Exploring stakeholders' views of medical education research priorities: a national survey.

PubMed

Dennis, Ashley A; Cleland, Jennifer A; Johnston, Peter; Ker, Jean S; Lough, Murray; Rees, Charlotte E

2014-11-01

Setting research priorities is important when exploring complex issues with limited resources. Only two countries (Canada and New Zealand) have previously conducted priority-setting exercises for medical education research (MER). This study aimed to identify the views of multiple stakeholders on MER priorities in Scotland. This study utilised a two-stage design to explore the views of stakeholders across the medical education continuum using online questionnaires. In Stage 1, key informants outlined their top three MER priorities and justified their choices. In Stage 2, participants rated 21 topics generated in Stage 1 according to importance and identified or justified their top priorities. A combination of qualitative (i.e. framework analysis) and quantitative (e.g. exploratory factor analysis) data analyses were employed. Views were gathered from over 1300 stakeholders. A total of 21 subthemes (or priority areas) identified in Stage 1 were explored further in Stage 2. The 21 items loaded onto five factors: the culture of learning together in the workplace; enhancing and valuing the role of educators; curriculum integration and innovation; bridging the gap between assessment and feedback, and building a resilient workforce. Within Stage 2, the top priority subthemes were: balancing conflicts between service and training; providing useful feedback; promoting resiliency and well-being; creating an effective workplace learning culture; selecting and recruiting doctors to reflect need, and ensuring that curricula prepare trainees for practice. Participant characteristics were related to the perceived importance of the factors. Finally, five themes explaining why participants prioritised items were identified: patient safety; quality of care; investing for the future; policy and political agendas, and evidence-based education. This study indicates that, across the spectrum of stakeholders and geography, certain MER priorities are consistently identified. These

Research Priorities for NCD Prevention and Climate Change: An International Delphi Survey

PubMed Central

Colagiuri, Ruth; Boylan, Sinead; Morrice, Emily

2015-01-01

Climate change and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are arguably the greatest global challenges of the 21st Century. However, the confluence between them remains under-examined and there is little evidence of a comprehensive, systematic approach to identifying research priorities to mitigate their joint impact. Consequently, we: (i) convened a workshop of academics (n = 25) from the Worldwide Universities Network to identify priority areas at the interface between NCDs and climate change; (ii) conducted a Delphi survey of international opinion leaders in public health and relevant other disciplines; and (iii) convened an expert panel to review and advise on final priorities. Three research areas (water security; transport; conceptualising NCD harms to support policy formation) were listed among the top 10 priorities by >90% of Delphi respondents, and ranked among the top 12 priorities by >60% of respondents who ranked the order of priority. A fourth area (reducing the carbon footprint of cities) was ranked highest by the same >60% of respondents. Our results are consistent with existing frameworks on health and climate change, and extends them by focusing specifically on NCDs. Researching these priorities could progress understanding of climate change and NCDs, and inform global and national policy decisions for mitigating associated harms. PMID:26501301

Research Priorities for NCD Prevention and Climate Change: An International Delphi Survey.

PubMed

Colagiuri, Ruth; Boylan, Sinead; Morrice, Emily

2015-10-16

Climate change and non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are arguably the greatest global challenges of the 21st Century. However, the confluence between them remains under-examined and there is little evidence of a comprehensive, systematic approach to identifying research priorities to mitigate their joint impact. Consequently, we: (i) convened a workshop of academics (n = 25) from the Worldwide Universities Network to identify priority areas at the interface between NCDs and climate change; (ii) conducted a Delphi survey of international opinion leaders in public health and relevant other disciplines; and (iii) convened an expert panel to review and advise on final priorities. Three research areas (water security; transport; conceptualising NCD harms to support policy formation) were listed among the top 10 priorities by >90% of Delphi respondents, and ranked among the top 12 priorities by >60% of respondents who ranked the order of priority. A fourth area (reducing the carbon footprint of cities) was ranked highest by the same >60% of respondents. Our results are consistent with existing frameworks on health and climate change, and extends them by focusing specifically on NCDs. Researching these priorities could progress understanding of climate change and NCDs, and inform global and national policy decisions for mitigating associated harms.

The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Research into the methods used in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trials is essential to ensure that effective methods are available and that clinical decisions made using results from trials are based on the best available evidence, which is reliable and robust. Methods An on-line Delphi survey of 48 UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) was undertaken. During round one, CTU Directors were asked to identify important topics that require methodological research. During round two, their opinion about the level of importance of each topic was recorded, and during round three, they were asked to review the group’s average opinion and revise their previous opinion if appropriate. Direct reminders were sent to maximise the number of responses at each round. Results are summarised using descriptive methods. Results Forty one (85%) CTU Directors responded to at least one round of the Delphi process: 25 (52%) responded in round one, 32 (67%) responded in round two, 24 (50%) responded in round three. There were only 12 (25%) who responded to all three rounds and 18 (38%) who responded to both rounds two and three. Consensus was achieved amongst CTU Directors that the top three priorities for trials methodological research were ‘Research into methods to boost recruitment in trials’ (considered the highest priority), ‘Methods to minimise attrition’ and ‘Choosing appropriate outcomes to measure’. Fifty other topics were included in the list of priorities and consensus was reached that two topics, ‘Radiotherapy study designs’ and ‘Low carbon trials’, were not priorities. Conclusions This priority setting exercise has identified the research topics felt to be most important to the key stakeholder group of Directors of UKCRC registered CTUs. The use of robust methodology to identify these priorities will help ensure that this work informs the trials methodological research agenda, with

Setting research priorities to improve global newborn health and prevent stillbirths by 2025

PubMed Central

Yoshida, Sachiyo; Martines, José; Lawn, Joy E; Wall, Stephen; Souza, Joăo Paulo; Rudan, Igor; Cousens, Simon; Aaby, Peter; Adam, Ishag; Adhikari, Ramesh Kant; Ambalavanan, Namasivayam; Arifeen, Shams EI; Aryal, Dhana Raj; Asiruddin, Sk; Baqui, Abdullah; Barros, Aluisio JD; Benn, Christine S; Bhandari, Vineet; Bhatnagar, Shinjini; Bhattacharya, Sohinee; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Black, Robert E; Blencowe, Hannah; Bose, Carl; Brown, Justin; Bührer, Christoph; Carlo, Wally; Cecatti, Jose Guilherme; Cheung, Po–Yin; Clark, Robert; Colbourn, Tim; Conde–Agudelo, Agustin; Corbett, Erica; Czeizel, Andrew E; Das, Abhik; Day, Louise Tina; Deal, Carolyn; Deorari, Ashok; Dilmen, Uğur; English, Mike; Engmann, Cyril; Esamai, Fabian; Fall, Caroline; Ferriero, Donna M; Gisore, Peter; Hazir, Tabish; Higgins, Rosemary D; Homer, Caroline SE; Hoque, DE; Irgens, Lorentz; Islam, MT; de Graft–Johnson, Joseph; Joshua, Martias Alice; Keenan, William; Khatoon, Soofia; Kieler, Helle; Kramer, Michael S; Lackritz, Eve M; Lavender, Tina; Lawintono, Laurensia; Luhanga, Richard; Marsh, David; McMillan, Douglas; McNamara, Patrick J; Mol, Ben Willem J; Molyneux, Elizabeth; Mukasa, G. K; Mutabazi, Miriam; Nacul, Luis Carlos; Nakakeeto, Margaret; Narayanan, Indira; Olusanya, Bolajoko; Osrin, David; Paul, Vinod; Poets, Christian; Reddy, Uma M; Santosham, Mathuram; Sayed, Rubayet; Schlabritz–Loutsevitch, Natalia E; Singhal, Nalini; Smith, Mary Alice; Smith, Peter G; Soofi, Sajid; Spong, Catherine Y; Sultana, Shahin; Tshefu, Antoinette; van Bel, Frank; Gray, Lauren Vestewig; Waiswa, Peter; Wang, Wei; Williams, Sarah LA; Wright, Linda; Zaidi, Anita; Zhang, Yanfeng; Zhong, Nanbert; Zuniga, Isabel; Bahl, Rajiv

2016-01-01

Background In 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013–2025. Methods We used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts. Results Nine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour. Conclusion These findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to

Setting research priorities to improve global newborn health and prevent stillbirths by 2025.

PubMed

Yoshida, Sachiyo; Martines, José; Lawn, Joy E; Wall, Stephen; Souza, Joăo Paulo; Rudan, Igor; Cousens, Simon; Aaby, Peter; Adam, Ishag; Adhikari, Ramesh Kant; Ambalavanan, Namasivayam; Arifeen, Shams Ei; Aryal, Dhana Raj; Asiruddin, Sk; Baqui, Abdullah; Barros, Aluisio Jd; Benn, Christine S; Bhandari, Vineet; Bhatnagar, Shinjini; Bhattacharya, Sohinee; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Black, Robert E; Blencowe, Hannah; Bose, Carl; Brown, Justin; Bührer, Christoph; Carlo, Wally; Cecatti, Jose Guilherme; Cheung, Po-Yin; Clark, Robert; Colbourn, Tim; Conde-Agudelo, Agustin; Corbett, Erica; Czeizel, Andrew E; Das, Abhik; Day, Louise Tina; Deal, Carolyn; Deorari, Ashok; Dilmen, Uğur; English, Mike; Engmann, Cyril; Esamai, Fabian; Fall, Caroline; Ferriero, Donna M; Gisore, Peter; Hazir, Tabish; Higgins, Rosemary D; Homer, Caroline Se; Hoque, D E; Irgens, Lorentz; Islam, M T; de Graft-Johnson, Joseph; Joshua, Martias Alice; Keenan, William; Khatoon, Soofia; Kieler, Helle; Kramer, Michael S; Lackritz, Eve M; Lavender, Tina; Lawintono, Laurensia; Luhanga, Richard; Marsh, David; McMillan, Douglas; McNamara, Patrick J; Mol, Ben Willem J; Molyneux, Elizabeth; Mukasa, G K; Mutabazi, Miriam; Nacul, Luis Carlos; Nakakeeto, Margaret; Narayanan, Indira; Olusanya, Bolajoko; Osrin, David; Paul, Vinod; Poets, Christian; Reddy, Uma M; Santosham, Mathuram; Sayed, Rubayet; Schlabritz-Loutsevitch, Natalia E; Singhal, Nalini; Smith, Mary Alice; Smith, Peter G; Soofi, Sajid; Spong, Catherine Y; Sultana, Shahin; Tshefu, Antoinette; van Bel, Frank; Gray, Lauren Vestewig; Waiswa, Peter; Wang, Wei; Williams, Sarah LA; Wright, Linda; Zaidi, Anita; Zhang, Yanfeng; Zhong, Nanbert; Zuniga, Isabel; Bahl, Rajiv

2016-06-01

In 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013-2025. We used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts. Nine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour. These findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national

Physiotherapy Research Priorities in Switzerland: Views of the Various Stakeholders.

PubMed

Nast, Irina; Tal, Amir; Schmid, Stefan; Schoeb, Veronika; Rau, Barbara; Barbero, Marco; Kool, Jan

2016-09-01

Research priorities, defined by multiple stakeholders, can proximally facilitate the coordination of research projects and national and international cooperation and distally further improve the quality of physiotherapy practice. The aim of this study was therefore to establish physiotherapy research priorities in Switzerland considering multiple stakeholders' opinions. A mixed methods design was chosen. For a qualitative identification of physiotherapy research topics, 18 focus group discussions and 23 semi-structured interviews/written commentaries were conducted. For the quantitative analysis, 420 participants prioritized research topics using a two-round Delphi questionnaire survey. The following stakeholder groups were surveyed in the German-speaking, French-speaking and Italian-speaking regions of Switzerland: physiotherapy researchers, practitioners and educators, representatives of patient organizations, public health organizations, health insurers, physicians, nurses, occupational therapists and other health professionals, as well as physical educators. The top five overall physiotherapy research priorities identified were as follows: physiotherapy treatment, physiotherapy assessment and diagnosis, prevention, physiotherapist-patient interaction and physiotherapy professional education at the bachelor level. With regard to diagnostic groups, the highest priorities were placed on musculoskeletal disorders, neurology, orthopaedics, geriatrics and ergonomics/occupational health. Consensus was moderate to high, and only few differences between stakeholder groups were revealed. Research directly related to physiotherapy treatment is of highest priority. It should focus on diagnostic groups related to chronicity in anticipation of demographic changes. Multidisciplinary networks for research and practice, alongside sound coordination of research projects, should increase the impact of physiotherapy research. An accurate dissemination of research priorities

Use of demand for and spatial flow of ecosystem services to identify priority areas.

PubMed

Verhagen, Willem; Kukkala, Aija S; Moilanen, Atte; van Teeffelen, Astrid J A; Verburg, Peter H

2017-08-01

Policies and research increasingly focus on the protection of ecosystem services (ESs) through priority-area conservation. Priority areas for ESs should be identified based on ES capacity and ES demand and account for the connections between areas of ES capacity and demand (flow) resulting in areas of unique demand-supply connections (flow zones). We tested ways to account for ES demand and flow zones to identify priority areas in the European Union. We mapped the capacity and demand of a global (carbon sequestration), a regional (flood regulation), and 3 local ESs (air quality, pollination, and urban leisure). We used Zonation software to identify priority areas for ESs based on 6 tests: with and without accounting for ES demand and 4 tests that accounted for the effect of ES flow zone. There was only 37.1% overlap between the 25% of priority areas that encompassed the most ESs with and without accounting for ES demand. The level of ESs maintained in the priority areas increased from 23.2% to 57.9% after accounting for ES demand, especially for ESs with a small flow zone. Accounting for flow zone had a small effect on the location of priority areas and level of ESs maintained but resulted in fewer flow zones without ES maintained relative to ignoring flow zones. Accounting for demand and flow zones enhanced representation and distribution of ESs with local to regional flow zones without large trade-offs relative to the global ES. We found that ignoring ES demand led to the identification of priority areas in remote regions where benefits from ES capacity to society were small. Incorporating ESs in conservation planning should therefore always account for ES demand to identify an effective priority network for ESs. © 2016 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.

Setting research priorities to improve the health of children and young people with neurodisability: a British Academy of Childhood Disability-James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Morris, Christopher; Simkiss, Doug; Busk, Mary; Morris, Maureen; Allard, Amanda; Denness, Jacob; Janssens, Astrid; Stimson, Anna; Coghill, Joanna; Robinson, Kelly; Fenton, Mark; Cowan, Katherine

2015-01-28

To engage young people, parent carers and clinicians in a systematic process to identify and prioritise research questions regarding ways to improve the health and well-being of children and young people with neurodisability. British Academy of Childhood Disability (BACD)-James Lind Alliance research priority setting partnership bringing together patients, carers and clinicians as equal stakeholders. UK health service and community. The BACD Strategic Research Group formed the partnership. A Steering Group was established; charity and professional partner organisations were recruited. Suggestions were gathered in an open survey and from research recommendations for statutory guidance. Items were aggregated to formulate indicative research questions and verified as uncertainties from research evidence. An interim survey was used to rank the questions to shortlist topics. A mixed group of stakeholders discussed the top 25 questions at the final priority setting workshop agreeing a final rank order and the top 10 research priorities. Partner organisations were 13 charities and 8 professional societies. 369 people submitted suggestions (40% non-clinicians). 76 people participated in the interim prioritisation (26 parents, 1 young person, 10 charity representatives, 39 clinicians); 22 took part in the final workshop (3 young people, 7 parents, 3 charity representatives, 9 professionals). The top three research priorities related to (1) establishing the optimal frequency and intensity (dose) for mainstream therapies, (2) means for selecting and encouraging use of communication strategies and (3) ways to improve children's attitudes towards disability. The top 10 included evaluating interventions to promote mobility, self-efficacy, mental health, continence, physical fitness, educational inclusion and reduce impacts of sleep disturbance. The methodology provided a systematic and transparent process to identify research priorities that included stakeholders that have

International identification of research priorities for postgraduate theses in musculoskeletal physiotherapy using a modified Delphi technique.

PubMed

Rushton, Alison; Moore, Ann

2010-04-01

Research priorities are established to identify gaps and maximise opportunities in developing an evidence base. Numerous postgraduate research theses are undertaken each year within the specialist area of musculoskeletal physiotherapy, and although some are published, greater potential for influence exists. This paper identifies international research priorities for postgraduate theses developed using a consensual Delphi process. A purposive sample included course tutors and expert clinicians nominated by Member Organisations of the International Federation of Orthopaedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (N=91). Round 1 requested >10 priorities for theses, and content analysis identified research themes. Round 2 requested participants rank the importance of each theme on a 1-5 scale, and round 3 requested ranking the importance and feasibility of the research question areas within each agreed theme. Descriptive analysis and use of Kendall's coefficient of concordance enabled interpretation of consensus. The response rate of 68% was good, identifying 23 research themes in round 1. Round 2 identified 14 research themes as important. Participant rating of the importance and feasibility of research question areas in round 3 supported 43 agreed priorities demonstrating good measurement validity. Establishing priorities provides a vision of how postgraduate theses can contribute to the developing evidence base and offer a focus for international collaboration. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Setting stroke research priorities: The consumer perspective.

PubMed

Sangvatanakul, Pukkaporn; Hillege, Sharon; Lalor, Erin; Levi, Christopher; Hill, Kelvin; Middleton, Sandy

2010-12-01

To test a method of engaging consumers in research priority-setting using a quantitative approach and to determine consumer views on stroke research priorities for clinical practice recommendations with lower levels of evidence (Level III and Level IV) and expert consensus opinion as published in the Australian stroke clinical practice guidelines. Survey Urban community Eighteen stroke survivors (n = 12) and carers (n = 6) who were members of the "Working Aged Group - Stroke" (WAGS) consumer support group. Phase I: Participants were asked whether recommendations were "worth" researching ("yes" or "no"); and, if researched, what potential impact they likely would have on patient outcomes. Phase II: Participants were asked to rank recommendations rated by more than 75% of participants in Phase I as "worth" researching and "highly likely" or "likely" to generate research with a significant effect on patient outcomes (n = 13) in order of priority for future stroke research. All recommendations were rated by at least half (n = 9, 50%) of participants as "worth" researching. The majority (67% to 100%) rated all recommendations as "highly likely" or "likely" that research would have a significant effect on patient outcomes. Thirteen out of 20 recommendations were ranked for their research priorities. Recommendations under the topic heading Getting to hospital were ranked highest and Organization of care and Living with stroke were ranked as a lower priority for research. This study provided an example of how to involve consumers in research priority setting successfully using a quantitative approach. Stroke research priorities from the consumer perspective were different from those of health professionals, as published in the literature; thus, consumer opinion should be considered when setting research priorities. Copyright © 2010 Society for Vascular Nursing, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

How Schools Can Promote Healthy Development for Newly Arrived Immigrant and Refugee Adolescents: Research Priorities.

PubMed

McNeely, Clea A; Morland, Lyn; Doty, S Benjamin; Meschke, Laurie L; Awad, Summer; Husain, Altaf; Nashwan, Ayat

2017-02-01

The US education system must find creative and effective ways to foster the healthy development of the approximately 2 million newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents, many of whom contend with language barriers, limited prior education, trauma, and discrimination. We identify research priorities for promoting the school success of these youth. The study used the 4-phase priority-setting method of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative. In the final stage, 132 researchers, service providers, educators, and policymakers based in the United States were asked to rate the importance of 36 research options. The highest priority research options (range 1 to 5) were: evaluating newcomer programs (mean = 4.44, SD = 0.55), identifying how family and community stressors affect newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents' functioning in school (mean = 4.40, SD = 0.56), identifying teachers' major stressors in working with this population (mean = 4.36, SD = 0.72), and identifying how to engage immigrant and refugee families in their children's education (mean = 4.35, SD = 0.62). These research priorities emphasize the generation of practical knowledge that could translate to immediate, tangible benefits for schools. Funders, schools, and researchers can use these research priorities to guide research for the highest benefit of schools and the newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents they serve. © 2017, American School Health Association.

Top ten research priorities for spinal cord injury: the methodology and results of a British priority setting partnership.

PubMed

van Middendorp, J J; Allison, H C; Ahuja, S; Bracher, D; Dyson, C; Fairbank, J; Gall, A; Glover, A; Gray, L; Masri, W El; Uttridge, A; Cowan, K

2016-05-01

This is a mixed-method consensus development project. The objective of this study was to identify a top ten list of priorities for future research into spinal cord injury (SCI). The British Spinal Cord Injury Priority Setting Partnership was established in 2013 and completed in 2014. Stakeholders included consumer organisations, healthcare professional societies and caregivers. This partnership involved the following four key stages: (i) gathering of research questions, (ii) checking of existing research evidence, (iii) interim prioritisation and (iv) a final consensus meeting to reach agreement on the top ten research priorities. Adult individuals with spinal cord dysfunction because of trauma or non-traumatic causes, including transverse myelitis, and individuals with a cauda equina syndrome (henceforth grouped and referred to as SCI) were invited to participate in this priority setting partnership. We collected 784 questions from 403 survey respondents (290 individuals with SCI), which, after merging duplicate questions and checking systematic reviews for evidence, were reduced to 109 unique unanswered research questions. A total of 293 people (211 individuals with SCI) participated in the interim prioritisation process, leading to the identification of 25 priorities. At a final consensus meeting, a representative group of individuals with SCI, caregivers and health professionals agreed on their top ten research priorities. Following a comprehensive, rigorous and inclusive process, with participation from individuals with SCI, caregivers and health professionals, the SCI research agenda has been defined by people to whom it matters most and should inform the scope and future activities of funders and researchers for the years to come. The NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre provided core funding for this project.

Priorities for research in soil ecology

PubMed Central

Eisenhauer, Nico; Antunes, Pedro M.; Bennett, Alison E.; Birkhofer, Klaus; Bissett, Andrew; Bowker, Matthew A.; Caruso, Tancredi; Chen, Baodong; Coleman, David C.; de Boer, Wietse; de Ruiter, Peter; DeLuca, Thomas H.; Frati, Francesco; Griffiths, Bryan S.; Hart, Miranda M.; Hättenschwiler, Stephan; Haimi, Jari; Heethoff, Michael; Kaneko, Nobuhiro; Kelly, Laura C.; Leinaas, Hans Petter; Lindo, Zoë; Macdonald, Catriona; Rillig, Matthias C.; Ruess, Liliane; Scheu, Stefan; Schmidt, Olaf; Seastedt, Timothy R.; van Straalen, Nico M.; Tiunov, Alexei V.; Zimmer, Martin; Powell, Jeff R.

2017-01-01

The ecological interactions that occur in and with soil are of consequence in many ecosystems on the planet. These interactions provide numerous essential ecosystem services, and the sustainable management of soils has attracted increasing scientific and public attention. Although soil ecology emerged as an independent field of research many decades ago, and we have gained important insights into the functioning of soils, there still are fundamental aspects that need to be better understood to ensure that the ecosystem services that soils provide are not lost and that soils can be used in a sustainable way. In this perspectives paper, we highlight some of the major knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in soil ecological research. These research priorities were compiled based on an online survey of 32 editors of Pedobiologia – Journal of Soil Ecology. These editors work at universities and research centers in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia.The questions were categorized into four themes: (1) soil biodiversity and biogeography, (2) interactions and the functioning of ecosystems, (3) global change and soil management, and (4) new directions. The respondents identified priorities that may be achievable in the near future, as well as several that are currently achievable but remain open. While some of the identified barriers to progress were technological in nature, many respondents cited a need for substantial leadership and goodwill among members of the soil ecology research community, including the need for multi-institutional partnerships, and had substantial concerns regarding the loss of taxonomic expertise. PMID:29129942

Priorities for research in soil ecology.

PubMed

Eisenhauer, Nico; Antunes, Pedro M; Bennett, Alison E; Birkhofer, Klaus; Bissett, Andrew; Bowker, Matthew A; Caruso, Tancredi; Chen, Baodong; Coleman, David C; de Boer, Wietse; de Ruiter, Peter; DeLuca, Thomas H; Frati, Francesco; Griffiths, Bryan S; Hart, Miranda M; Hättenschwiler, Stephan; Haimi, Jari; Heethoff, Michael; Kaneko, Nobuhiro; Kelly, Laura C; Leinaas, Hans Petter; Lindo, Zoë; Macdonald, Catriona; Rillig, Matthias C; Ruess, Liliane; Scheu, Stefan; Schmidt, Olaf; Seastedt, Timothy R; van Straalen, Nico M; Tiunov, Alexei V; Zimmer, Martin; Powell, Jeff R

2017-07-01

The ecological interactions that occur in and with soil are of consequence in many ecosystems on the planet. These interactions provide numerous essential ecosystem services, and the sustainable management of soils has attracted increasing scientific and public attention. Although soil ecology emerged as an independent field of research many decades ago, and we have gained important insights into the functioning of soils, there still are fundamental aspects that need to be better understood to ensure that the ecosystem services that soils provide are not lost and that soils can be used in a sustainable way. In this perspectives paper, we highlight some of the major knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in soil ecological research. These research priorities were compiled based on an online survey of 32 editors of Pedobiologia - Journal of Soil Ecology. These editors work at universities and research centers in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia.The questions were categorized into four themes: (1) soil biodiversity and biogeography, (2) interactions and the functioning of ecosystems, (3) global change and soil management, and (4) new directions. The respondents identified priorities that may be achievable in the near future, as well as several that are currently achievable but remain open. While some of the identified barriers to progress were technological in nature, many respondents cited a need for substantial leadership and goodwill among members of the soil ecology research community, including the need for multi-institutional partnerships, and had substantial concerns regarding the loss of taxonomic expertise.

Research priorities for respiratory nursing: a UK-wide Delphi study.

PubMed

Kelly, Carol Ann; Kirkcaldy, Andrew J; Pilkington, Melissa; Hodson, Matthew; Welch, Lindsay; Yorke, Janelle; Knighting, Katherine

2018-04-01

Respiratory nurses make a significant contribution to the delivery of respiratory healthcare, but there is a dearth of nurse-led, practice-focused, published research. Using a modified three-round Delphi, this study sought to identify research priorities for respiratory nursing to inform a national research strategy. Study information and the survey link were sent electronically to members of UK professional respiratory organisations. Round 1 had 78 items across 16 topics, informed by a systematic literature review. Respondents suggested additional items which were content analysed to inform Round 2. Respondents rated all items and ranked the topics in all rounds. To ensure rigour, rounds had an explicit focus with pre-determined criteria for consensus (70%). In total, 363 responses were received across Rounds 1, 2 and 3 (n=183, 95 and 85, respectively). The top five research priorities were: 1) "Patient understanding of asthma control"; 2) "The clinical and cost-effectiveness of respiratory nurse interventions"; 3) "The impact of nurse-led clinics on patient care"; 4) "Inhaler technique"; and 5) two topics jointly scored: "Prevention of exacerbations" and "Symptom management". With potential international significance, this is the first UK study to identify research priorities for respiratory nursing, providing direction for those planning or undertaking research.

Research priorities for respiratory nursing: a UK-wide Delphi study

PubMed Central

Pilkington, Melissa; Hodson, Matthew; Welch, Lindsay; Yorke, Janelle

2018-01-01

Respiratory nurses make a significant contribution to the delivery of respiratory healthcare, but there is a dearth of nurse-led, practice-focused, published research. Using a modified three-round Delphi, this study sought to identify research priorities for respiratory nursing to inform a national research strategy. Study information and the survey link were sent electronically to members of UK professional respiratory organisations. Round 1 had 78 items across 16 topics, informed by a systematic literature review. Respondents suggested additional items which were content analysed to inform Round 2. Respondents rated all items and ranked the topics in all rounds. To ensure rigour, rounds had an explicit focus with pre-determined criteria for consensus (70%). In total, 363 responses were received across Rounds 1, 2 and 3 (n=183, 95 and 85, respectively). The top five research priorities were: 1) “Patient understanding of asthma control”; 2) “The clinical and cost-effectiveness of respiratory nurse interventions”; 3) “The impact of nurse-led clinics on patient care”; 4) “Inhaler technique”; and 5) two topics jointly scored: “Prevention of exacerbations” and “Symptom management”. With potential international significance, this is the first UK study to identify research priorities for respiratory nursing, providing direction for those planning or undertaking research. PMID:29692999

Research priorities for conservation and natural resource management in Oceania's small-island developing states.

PubMed

Weeks, R; Adams, V M

2018-02-01

For conservation science to effectively inform management, research must focus on creating the scientific knowledge required to solve conservation problems. We identified research questions that, if answered, would increase the effectiveness of conservation and natural resource management practice and policy in Oceania's small-island developing states. We asked conservation professionals from academia, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations across the region to propose such questions and then identify which were of high priority in an online survey. We compared the high-priority questions with research questions identified globally and for other regions. Of 270 questions proposed by respondents, 38 were considered high priority, including: What are the highest priority areas for conservation in the face of increasing resource demand and climate change? How should marine protected areas be networked to account for connectivity and climate change? What are the most effective fisheries management policies that contribute to sustainable coral reef fisheries? High-priority questions related to the particular challenges of undertaking conservation on small-island developing states and the need for a research agenda that is responsive to the sociocultural context of Oceania. Research priorities for Oceania relative to elsewhere were broadly similar but differed in specific issues relevant to particular conservation contexts. These differences emphasize the importance of involving local practitioners in the identification of research priorities. Priorities were reasonably well aligned among sectoral groups. Only a few questions were widely considered answered, which may indicate a smaller-than-expected knowledge-action gap. We believe these questions can be used to strengthen research collaborations between scientists and practitioners working to further conservation and natural resource management in this region. © 2017 The Authors. Conservation Biology

Priorities for development of research methods in occupational cancer.

PubMed Central

Ward, Elizabeth M; Schulte, Paul A; Bayard, Steve; Blair, Aaron; Brandt-Rauf, Paul; Butler, Mary Ann; Dankovic, David; Hubbs, Ann F; Jones, Carol; Karstadt, Myra; Kedderis, Gregory L; Melnick, Ronald; Redlich, Carrie A; Rothman, Nathaniel; Savage, Russell E; Sprinker, Michael; Toraason, Mark; Weston, Ainsley; Olshan, Andrew F; Stewart, Patricia; Zahm, Sheila Hoar

2003-01-01

Occupational cancer research methods was identified in 1996 as 1 of 21 priority research areas in the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). To implement NORA, teams of experts from various sectors were formed and given the charge to further define research needs and develop strategies to enhance or augment research in each priority area. This article is a product of that process. Focus on occupational cancer research methods is important both because occupational factors play a significant role in a number of cancers, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality, and also because occupational cohorts (because of higher exposure levels) often provide unique opportunities to evaluate health effects of environmental toxicants and understand the carcinogenic process in humans. Despite an explosion of new methods for cancer research in general, these have not been widely applied to occupational cancer research. In this article we identify needs and gaps in occupational cancer research methods in four broad areas: identification of occupational carcinogens, design of epidemiologic studies, risk assessment, and primary and secondary prevention. Progress in occupational cancer will require interdisciplinary research involving epidemiologists, industrial hygienists, toxicologists, and molecular biologists. PMID:12524210

Shared research priorities for pessary use in women with prolapse: results from a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Hagen, Suzanne; McClurg, Doreen; Pollock, Alex

2018-01-01

Objectives To identify the shared priorities for future research of women affected by and clinicians involved with pessary use for the management of prolapse. Design A priority setting project using a consensus method. Setting A James Lind Alliance Pessary use for prolapse Priority Setting Partnership (JLA Pessary PSP) conducted from May 2016 to September 2017 in the UK. Participants The PSP was run by a Steering Group of three women with experience of pessary use, three experienced clinicians involved with management of prolapse, two researchers with relevant experience, a JLA adviser and a PSP leader. Two surveys were conducted in 2016 and 2017. The first gathered questions about pessaries, and the second asked respondents to prioritise a list of questions. A final workshop was held on 8 September 2017 involving 10 women and 13 clinician representatives with prolapse and pessary experience. Results A top 10 list of priorities for future research in pessary use for prolapse was agreed by consensus. Conclusions Women with experience of pessary use and clinicians involved with prolapse management have worked together to determine shared priorities for future research. Aligning the top 10 results with existing research findings will highlight the gaps in current evidence and signpost future research to areas of priority. Effective dissemination of the results will enable research funding bodies to focus on gathering the evidence to answer the questions that matter most to those who will be affected. PMID:29705767

Maternal and perinatal health research priorities beyond 2015: an international survey and prioritization exercise.

PubMed

Souza, Joao Paulo; Widmer, Mariana; Gülmezoglu, Ahmet Metin; Lawrie, Theresa Anne; Adejuyigbe, Ebunoluwa Aderonke; Carroli, Guillermo; Crowther, Caroline; Currie, Sheena M; Dowswell, Therese; Hofmeyr, Justus; Lavender, Tina; Lawn, Joy; Mader, Silke; Martinez, Francisco Eulógio; Mugerwa, Kidza; Qureshi, Zahida; Silvestre, Maria Asuncion; Soltani, Hora; Torloni, Maria Regina; Tsigas, Eleni Z; Vowles, Zoe; Ouedraogo, Léopold; Serruya, Suzanne; Al-Raiby, Jamela; Awin, Narimah; Obara, Hiromi; Mathai, Matthews; Bahl, Rajiv; Martines, José; Ganatra, Bela; Phillips, Sharon Jelena; Johnson, Brooke Ronald; Vogel, Joshua P; Oladapo, Olufemi T; Temmerman, Marleen

2014-08-07

Maternal mortality has declined by nearly half since 1990, but over a quarter million women still die every year of causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. Maternal-health related targets are falling short of the 2015 Millennium Development Goals and a post-2015 Development Agenda is emerging. In connection with this, setting global research priorities for the next decade is now required. We adapted the methods of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to identify and set global research priorities for maternal and perinatal health for the period 2015 to 2025. Priority research questions were received from various international stakeholders constituting a large reference group, and consolidated into a final list of research questions by a technical working group. Questions on this list were then scored by the reference working group according to five independent and equally weighted criteria. Normalized research priority scores (NRPS) were calculated, and research priority questions were ranked accordingly. A list of 190 priority research questions for improving maternal and perinatal health was scored by 140 stakeholders. Most priority research questions (89%) were concerned with the evaluation of implementation and delivery of existing interventions, with research subthemes frequently concerned with training and/or awareness interventions (11%), and access to interventions and/or services (14%). Twenty-one questions (11%) involved the discovery of new interventions or technologies. Key research priorities in maternal and perinatal health were identified. The resulting ranked list of research questions provides a valuable resource for health research investors, researchers and other stakeholders. We are hopeful that this exercise will inform the post-2015 Development Agenda and assist donors, research-policy decision makers and researchers to invest in research that will ultimately make the most significant difference in the lives of

Research priorities in mesothelioma: A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Stephens, R J; Whiting, C; Cowan, K

2015-08-01

In the UK, despite the import and use of all forms of asbestos being banned more than 15 years ago, the incidence of mesothelioma continues to rise. Mesothelioma is almost invariably fatal, and more research is required, not only to find more effective treatments, but also to achieve an earlier diagnosis and improve palliative care. Following a debate in the House of Lords in July 2013, a package of measures was agreed, which included a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership, funded by the National Institute for Health Research. The partnership brought together patients, carers, health professionals and support organisations to agree the top 10 research priorities relating to the diagnosis, treatment and care of patients with mesothelioma. Following the established James Lind Alliance priority setting process, mesothelioma patients, current and bereaved carers, and health professionals were surveyed to elicit their concerns regarding diagnosis, treatment and care. Research questions were generated from the survey responses, and following checks that the questions were currently unanswered, an interim prioritisation survey was conducted to identify a shortlist of questions to take to a final consensus meeting. Four hundred and fifty-three initial surveys were returned, which were refined into 52 unique unanswered research questions. The interim prioritisation survey was completed by 202 responders, and the top 30 questions were taken to a final meeting where mesothelioma patients, carers, and health professionals prioritised all the questions, and reached a consensus on the top 10. The top 10 questions cover a wide portfolio of research (including assessing the value of immunotherapy, individualised chemotherapy, second-line treatment and immediate chemotherapy, monitoring patients with pleural thickening, defining the management of ascites in peritoneal mesothelioma, and optimising follow-up strategy). This list is an invaluable resource, which should be

Priorities for research in miscarriage: a priority setting partnership between people affected by miscarriage and professionals following the James Lind Alliance methodology

PubMed Central

Bagness, Carmel; Brewin, Jane; Coomarasamy, Arri; Easthope, Lucy; Hepworth-Jones, Barbara; Hinshaw, Kim; O'Toole, Emily; Orford, Julie; Regan, Lesley; Raine-Fenning, Nick; Shakespeare, Judy; Small, Rachel; Thornton, Jim; Metcalf, Leanne

2017-01-01

Objectives To identify and prioritise important research questions for miscarriage. Design A priority setting partnership using prospective surveys and consensus meetings following methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. Setting UK. Participants Women and those affected by miscarriage working alongside healthcare professionals. Results In the initial survey, 1093 participants (932 women who have experienced miscarriage, 8 partners, 17 family members, friends or colleagues, 104 healthcare professionals and eight charitable organisations) submitted 3279 questions. A review of existing literature identified a further 64. Non-questions were removed, and the remaining questions were categorised and summarised into 58 questions. In an interim electronic survey, 2122 respondents chose their top 10 priorities from the 58 summary questions. The 25 highest ranked in the survey were prioritised at a final face-to-face workshop. In summary, the top 10 priorities were ranked as follows: research into preventative treatment, emotional aspects in general, investigation, relevance of pre-existing medical conditions, emotional support as a treatment, importance of lifestyle factors, importance of genetic and chromosomal causes, preconception tests, investigation after different numbers of miscarriage and male causal factors. Conclusions These results should be the focus of future miscarriage research. Presently, studies are being conducted to address the top priority; however, many other priorities, especially psychological and emotional support, are less well researched areas. We hope our results will encourage both researchers and funders to focus on these priorities. PMID:28838896

Top 10 research priorities relating to stroke nursing: a rigorous approach to establish a national nurse-led research agenda.

PubMed

Rowat, Anne; Pollock, Alex; St George, Bridget; Cowey, Eileen; Booth, Joanne; Lawrence, Maggie

2016-11-01

To determine the top 10 research priorities specific to stroke nursing. It is important that stroke nurses build their research capability and capacity. This project built on a previous James Lind Alliance prioritization project, which established the shared stroke research priorities of stroke survivors, carers and health professionals. Research priority setting project using James Lind Alliance methods; a survey for interim prioritization and a consensus meeting for final priority setting. Between September - November 2014, stroke nurses were invited to select their top 10 priorities from a previously established list of 226 unique unanswered questions. These data were used to generate a list of shared research priorities (interim priority setting stage). A purposefully selected group of stroke nurses attended a final consensus meeting (April 2015) to determine the top 10 research priorities. During the interim prioritization stage, 97 stroke nurses identified 28 shared priority treatment uncertainties. At the final consensus meeting, 27 stroke nurses reached agreement on the top 10 stroke nursing research priorities. Five of the top 10 questions relate to stroke-specific impairments and five relate to rehabilitation and long-term consequences of stroke. The research agenda for stroke nursing has now been clearly defined, facilitating nurses to undertake research, which is of importance to stroke survivors and carers and central to supporting optimal recovery and quality of life after stroke. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Priorities for Improving the Quality and Value of Critical Care.

PubMed

Stelfox, Henry T; Niven, Daniel J; Clement, Fiona M; Bagshaw, Sean M; Cook, Deborah J; McKenzie, Emily; Potestio, Melissa L; Doig, Christopher J; O'Neill, Barbara; Zygun, David

2015-01-01

Large amounts of scientific evidence are generated, but not implemented into patient care (the 'knowledge-to-care' gap). We identified and prioritized knowledge-to-care gaps in critical care as opportunities to improve the quality and value of healthcare. We used a multi-method community-based participatory research approach to engage a Network of all adult (n = 14) and pediatric (n = 2) medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) in a fully integrated geographically defined healthcare system serving 4 million residents. Participants included Network oversight committee members (n = 38) and frontline providers (n = 1,790). Network committee members used a modified RAND/University of California Appropriateness Methodology, to serially propose, rate (validated 9 point scale) and revise potential knowledge-to-care gaps as priorities for improvement. The priorities were sent to frontline providers for evaluation. Results were relayed back to all frontline providers for feedback. Initially, 68 knowledge-to-care gaps were proposed, rated and revised by the committee (n = 32 participants) over 3 rounds of review and resulted in 13 proposed priorities for improvement. Then, 1,103 providers (62% response rate) evaluated the priorities, and rated 9 as 'necessary' (median score 7-9). Several factors were associated with rating priorities as necessary in multivariable logistic regression, related to the provider (experience, teaching status of ICU) and topic (strength of supporting evidence, potential to benefit the patient, potential to improve patient/family experience, potential to decrease costs). A community-based participatory research approach engaged a diverse group of stakeholders to identify 9 priorities for improving the quality and value of critical care. The approach was time and cost efficient and could serve as a model to prioritize areas for research quality improvement across other settings.

Setting priorities for a research agenda to combat drug-resistant tuberculosis in children.

PubMed

Velayutham, B; Nair, D; Ramalingam, S; Perez-Velez, C M; Becerra, M C; Swaminathan, S

2015-12-21

Numerous knowledge gaps hamper the prevention and treatment of childhood drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB). Identifying research priorities is vital to inform and develop strategies to address this neglected problem. To systematically identify and rank research priorities in childhood drug-resistant TB. Adapting the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology, we compiled 53 research questions in four research areas, then classified the questions into three research types. We invited experts in childhood drug-resistant TB to score these questions through an online survey. A total of 81 respondents participated in the survey. The top-ranked research question was to identify the best combination of existing diagnostic tools for early diagnosis. Highly ranked treatment-related questions centred on the reasons for and interventions to improve treatment outcomes, adverse effects of drugs and optimal treatment duration. The prevalence of drug-resistant TB was the highest-ranked question in the epidemiology area. The development type questions that ranked highest focused on interventions for optimal diagnosis, treatment and modalities for treatment delivery. This is the first effort to identify and rank research priorities for childhood drug-resistant TB. The result is a resource to guide research to improve prevention and treatment of drug-resistant TB in children.

Identifying environmental health priorities in underserved populations: a study of rural versus urban communities

PubMed Central

Bernhard, M.C.; Evans, M.B.; Kent, S.T.; Johnson, E.; Threadgill, S.L.; Tyson, S.; Becker, S.M.; Gohlke, J.M.

2013-01-01

Objectives Understanding and effectively addressing persistent health disparities in minority communities requires a clear picture of members’ concerns and priorities. This study was intended to engage residents in urban and rural communities in order to identify environmental health priorities. Specific emphasis was placed on how the communities defined the term environment, their perceptions of environmental exposures as affecting their health, specific priorities in their communities, and differences in urban versus rural populations. Study design A community-engaged approach was used to develop and implement focus groups and compare environmental health priorities in urban versus rural communities. Methods A total of eight focus groups were conducted: four in rural and four in urban communities. Topics included defining the term environment, how the environment may affect health, and environmental priorities within their communities, using both open discussion and a predefined list. Data were analysed both qualitatively and quantitatively to identify patterns and trends. Results There were important areas of overlap in priorities between urban and rural communities; both emphasized the importance of the social environment and shared a concern over air pollution from industrial sources. In contrast, for urban focus groups, abandoned houses and their social and physical sequelae were a high priority while concerns about adequate sewer and water services and road maintenance were high priorities in rural communities. Conclusions This study was able to identify environmental health priorities in urban versus rural minority communities. In contrast to some previous risk perception research, the results of this study suggest prioritization of tangible, known risks in everyday life instead of rare, disaster-related events, even in communities that have recently experienced devastating damage from tornadoes. The findings can help inform future efforts to study

Developing a national dental education research strategy: priorities, barriers and enablers

PubMed Central

Barton, Karen L; Dennis, Ashley A; Rees, Charlotte E

2017-01-01

Objectives This study aimed to identify national dental education research (DER) priorities for the next 3–5 years and to identify barriers and enablers to DER. Setting Scotland. Participants In this two-stage online questionnaire study, we collected data with multiple dental professions (eg, dentistry, dental nursing and dental hygiene) and stakeholder groups (eg, learners, clinicians, educators, managers, researchers and academics). Eighty-five participants completed the Stage 1 qualitative questionnaire and 649 participants the Stage 2 quantitative questionnaire. Results Eight themes were identified at Stage 1. Of the 24 DER priorities identified, the top three were: role of assessments in identifying competence; undergraduate curriculum prepares for practice and promoting teamwork. Following exploratory factor analysis, the 24 items loaded onto four factors: teamwork and professionalism, measuring and enhancing performance, dental workforce issues and curriculum integration and innovation. Barriers and enablers existed at multiple levels: individual, interpersonal, institutional structures and cultures and technology. Conclusions This priority setting exercise provides a necessary first step to developing a national DER strategy capturing multiple perspectives. Promoting DER requires improved resourcing alongside efforts to overcome peer stigma and lack of valuing and motivation. PMID:28360237

Research priorities to reduce the global burden of dementia by 2025.

PubMed

Shah, Hiral; Albanese, Emiliano; Duggan, Cynthia; Rudan, Igor; Langa, Kenneth M; Carrillo, Maria C; Chan, Kit Yee; Joanette, Yves; Prince, Martin; Rossor, Martin; Saxena, Shekhar; Snyder, Heather M; Sperling, Reisa; Varghese, Mathew; Wang, Huali; Wortmann, Marc; Dua, Tarun

2016-11-01

At the First WHO Ministerial Conference on Global Action Against Dementia in March, 2015, 160 delegates, including representatives from 80 WHO Member States and four UN agencies, agreed on a call for action to reduce the global burden of dementia by fostering a collective effort to advance research. To drive this effort, we completed a globally representative research prioritisation exercise using an adapted version of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method. We elicited 863 research questions from 201 participants and consolidated these questions into 59 thematic research avenues, which were scored anonymously by 162 researchers and stakeholders from 39 countries according to five criteria. Six of the top ten research priorities were focused on prevention, identification, and reduction of dementia risk, and on delivery and quality of care for people with dementia and their carers. Other priorities related to diagnosis, biomarkers, treatment development, basic research into disease mechanisms, and public awareness and understanding of dementia. Research priorities identified by this systematic international process should be mapped onto the global dementia research landscape to identify crucial gaps and inform and motivate policy makers, funders, and researchers to support and conduct research to reduce the global burden of dementia. Efforts are needed by all stakeholders, including WHO, WHO Member States, and civil society, to continuously monitor research investments and progress, through international platforms such as a Global Dementia Observatory. With established research priorities, an opportunity now exists to translate the call for action into a global dementia action plan to reduce the global burden of dementia. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Development of research priorities in paediatric pain and palliative care

PubMed Central

Liossi, Christina; Anderson, Anna-Karenia; Howard, Richard F

2016-01-01

Priority setting for healthcare research is as important as conducting the research itself because rigorous and systematic processes of priority setting can make an important contribution to the quality of research. This project aimed to prioritise clinical therapeutic uncertainties in paediatric pain and palliative care in order to encourage and inform the future research agenda and raise the profile of paediatric pain and palliative care in the United Kingdom. Clinical therapeutic uncertainties were identified and transformed into patient, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) format and prioritised using a modified Nominal Group Technique. Members of the Clinical Studies Group in Pain and Palliative Care within National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network (CRN)-Children took part in the prioritisation exercise. There were 11 clinically active professionals spanning across a wide range of paediatric disciplines and one parent representative. The top three research priorities related to establishing the safety and efficacy of (1) gabapentin in the management of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics, (2) intravenous non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the management of post-operative pain in pre-schoolers and (3) different opioid formulations in the management of acute pain in children while at home. Questions about the long-term effect of psychological interventions in the management of chronic pain and various pharmacological interventions to improve pain and symptom management in palliative care were among the ‘top 10’ priorities. The results of prioritisation were included in the UK Database of Uncertainties about the Effects of Treatments (DUETS) database. Increased awareness of priorities and priority-setting processes should encourage clinicians and other stakeholders to engage in such exercises in the future. PMID:28386399

Shared research priorities for pessary use in women with prolapse: results from a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Lough, Kate; Hagen, Suzanne; McClurg, Doreen; Pollock, Alex

2018-04-28

To identify the shared priorities for future research of women affected by and clinicians involved with pessary use for the management of prolapse. A priority setting project using a consensus method. A James Lind Alliance Pessary use for prolapse Priority Setting Partnership (JLA Pessary PSP) conducted from May 2016 to September 2017 in the UK. The PSP was run by a Steering Group of three women with experience of pessary use, three experienced clinicians involved with management of prolapse, two researchers with relevant experience, a JLA adviser and a PSP leader. Two surveys were conducted in 2016 and 2017. The first gathered questions about pessaries, and the second asked respondents to prioritise a list of questions. A final workshop was held on 8 September 2017 involving 10 women and 13 clinician representatives with prolapse and pessary experience. A top 10 list of priorities for future research in pessary use for prolapse was agreed by consensus. Women with experience of pessary use and clinicians involved with prolapse management have worked together to determine shared priorities for future research. Aligning the top 10 results with existing research findings will highlight the gaps in current evidence and signpost future research to areas of priority. Effective dissemination of the results will enable research funding bodies to focus on gathering the evidence to answer the questions that matter most to those who will be affected. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Trends and priorities in occupational health research and knowledge transfer in Italy.

PubMed

Rondinone, Bruna Maria; Boccuni, Fabio; Iavicoli, Sergio

2010-06-01

In 2000-2001, the Italian National Institute for Occupational Safety and Prevention (ISPESL) carried out a survey to identify the research priorities in the field of occupational safety and health (OSH). The present study, carried out in 2007-2008, was a follow-up designed to (i) review the themes identified earlier, (ii) detect emerging issues linked to new risks and forms of work, and (iii) look for any shifts in focus. The survey was extended to cover not only research but also the concept of knowledge transfer. In the first round, ISPESL distributed questionnaires to the heads of both university occupational medicine departments and prevention departments in local national health units (known as ASL in Italy) asking respondents to identify OSH priority themes. In the latest survey covering both research and the need for knowledge transfer, the same experts were asked to rank the importance of the earlier-identified topics and list any emerging issues in the OSH field. The two most important themes identified were "work accidents" and "occupational carcinogenesis". In the overall sample and among ASL experts, they received the 1st and 2nd highest mean scores. The university respondents also prioritized them but in reverse order. Some of the new priority topics included: risks associated with nanotechnologies; assessment of psychosocial and organizational risks; migration and work; and cost-benefit analysis of prevention. In light of the findings, efforts are urgently needed to identify research and knowledge transfer priorities related to workers' health and safety on an international scale using a standardized method in order to obtain comparable results, avoid wasteful duplication of resources, and reduce occupational accidents and illness.

Priority issues for pressure injury research: An Australian consensus study.

PubMed

Haesler, Emily; Carville, Keryln; Haesler, Paul

2018-06-08

Pressure injuries are a significant health concern in all clinical settings. The current body of research on pressure injuries reported in the literature presents primarily low level evidence. The purpose of the current study was to identify and prioritize pressure injury research issues. The approach entailed evidence scoping and implementing a formal consensus process using a modified nominal group technique based on the Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles appropriateness method. Sixteen Australian pressure injury experts participated in five consensus voting rounds in May to June 2015. From 60 initial research issues, the experts reached agreement that 26 issues are a priority for future pressure injury research. The highest priorities were strategies to assess skin and tissues, appropriate outcome measures for indicators of pressure injury healing and recurrence, heel pressure off-loading and shear reduction strategies, economic cost of pressure injuries and their management and effectiveness of skin moisturizers and barrier products. Developing a prioritized research agenda, informed by clinical and academic pressure injury experts, can assist in reducing the burden of pressure injuries by identifying topics of the highest need for further research. A web-based nominal group voting process was successful in engaging expert decision-making and has wide-reaching international appeal in facilitating cost-effective consensus methodologies. The priority list generated from this research is currently used in Australia to inform government investment in pressure injury research. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Research priorities for nursing and midwifery in Southern Ireland.

PubMed

McCarthy, G; Savage, E; Lehane, E

2006-06-01

To identify research priorities for nursing and midwifery in the Southern Health Board area in Ireland for the immediate and long term. Ten focus groups were conducted over a 2-month period with 70 nurses and midwives working in clinical, managerial and educational roles participating. Based on focus group findings and a literature review a multi-item Likert type questionnaire was constructed and administered to 520 nurses and midwives (response rate 95%n=494). Research priorities were identified as: (1) impact of staff shortages on retention of RNs/RM's (80%); (2) quality of life of chronically ill patients (76%); (3) stress and bullying in the workplace (76%); (4) assessment and management of pain (75%); (5) skill mix and staff burnout (73%); (6) cardio-pulmonary resuscitation decision making (72%); (7) coordination of care between hospital and primary care settings (69%); (8) medication errors (67%); and (9) promoting healthy lifestyles (64%). Respondents also indicated that these priorities warranted immediate attention. Implications for practice include the need for: (1) emphasis on quality pain control; (2) recognition and exploration of the ethical issues relating to resuscitation; and (3) management of the context within which clinical care is given.

Global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention: a modified Delphi study.

PubMed

Mikton, Christopher R; Tanaka, Masako; Tomlinson, Mark; Streiner, David L; Tonmyr, Lil; Lee, Bandy X; Fisher, Jane; Hegadoren, Kathy; Pim, Joam Evans; Wang, Shr-Jie Sharlenna; MacMillan, Harriet L

2017-01-01

To establish global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention using a systematic approach. Research priorities were identified in a three-round process involving two surveys. In round 1, 95 global experts in violence prevention proposed research questions to be ranked in round 2. Questions were collated and organized according to the four-step public health approach to violence prevention. In round 2, 280 international experts ranked the importance of research in the four steps, and the various substeps, of the public health approach. In round 3, 131 international experts ranked the importance of detailed research questions on the public health step awarded the highest priority in round 2. In round 2, "developing, implementing and evaluating interventions" was the step of the public health approach awarded the highest priority for four of the six types of violence considered (i.e. child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, armed violence and sexual violence) but not for youth violence or elder abuse. In contrast, "scaling up interventions and evaluating their cost-effectiveness" was ranked lowest for all types of violence. In round 3, research into "developing, implementing and evaluating interventions" that addressed parenting or laws to regulate the use of firearms was awarded the highest priority. The key limitations of the study were response and attrition rates among survey respondents. However, these rates were in line with similar priority-setting exercises. These findings suggest it is premature to scale up violence prevention interventions. Developing and evaluating smaller-scale interventions should be the funding priority.

What are today's priorities in research?

PubMed

1994-01-01

The World Health Organization (WHO) Global Programme on AIDS has identified priority areas of HIV/AIDS-related research. Vaccine trials are need to evaluate their effectiveness and their accessibility and availability (supply and price) to developing countries with the greatest need. The pharmaceutical industry and national governments should work to develop microbicidal agents for use in the vagina. Research on the care of people with AIDS is needed to document the best way to provide their care in developing countries and to improve their quality of life. Another research priority is the resurgence of tuberculosis (TB): its association with HIV infection, and management of TB in areas where the HIV prevalence is high. WHO would like to see research establishing simplified case management regimes for the control and management of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), STD case management that can be integrated into primary health care systems or at the primary health care level, simple and inexpensive diagnostic tests (particularly for women, who often are asymptomatic), and integration of STD management into family planning programs. More research needs to conducted on the availability and use of female condoms, so women can enhance their capability of protecting themselves. WHO would like more HIV/AIDS-related behavior research in the following areas: descriptive research, economic impact, community support, women's empowerment, and behavior change. HIV/AIDS-related researchers should ask themselves 3 fundamental questions: Does it work? What is the best way to do it? What does it cost?

Priorities for research in miscarriage: a priority setting partnership between people affected by miscarriage and professionals following the James Lind Alliance methodology.

PubMed

Prior, Matthew; Bagness, Carmel; Brewin, Jane; Coomarasamy, Arri; Easthope, Lucy; Hepworth-Jones, Barbara; Hinshaw, Kim; O'Toole, Emily; Orford, Julie; Regan, Lesley; Raine-Fenning, Nick; Shakespeare, Judy; Small, Rachel; Thornton, Jim; Metcalf, Leanne

2017-08-23

To identify and prioritise important research questions for miscarriage. A priority setting partnership using prospective surveys and consensus meetings following methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. UK. Women and those affected by miscarriage working alongside healthcare professionals. In the initial survey, 1093 participants (932 women who have experienced miscarriage, 8 partners, 17 family members, friends or colleagues, 104 healthcare professionals and eight charitable organisations) submitted 3279 questions. A review of existing literature identified a further 64. Non-questions were removed, and the remaining questions were categorised and summarised into 58 questions. In an interim electronic survey, 2122 respondents chose their top 10 priorities from the 58 summary questions. The 25 highest ranked in the survey were prioritised at a final face-to-face workshop. In summary, the top 10 priorities were ranked as follows: research into preventative treatment, emotional aspects in general, investigation, relevance of pre-existing medical conditions, emotional support as a treatment, importance of lifestyle factors, importance of genetic and chromosomal causes, preconception tests, investigation after different numbers of miscarriage and male causal factors. These results should be the focus of future miscarriage research. Presently, studies are being conducted to address the top priority; however, many other priorities, especially psychological and emotional support, are less well researched areas. We hope our results will encourage both researchers and funders to focus on these priorities. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Setting research priorities for patients on or nearing dialysis.

PubMed

Manns, Braden; Hemmelgarn, Brenda; Lillie, Erin; Dip, Sally Crowe P G; Cyr, Annette; Gladish, Michael; Large, Claire; Silverman, Howard; Toth, Brenda; Wolfs, Wim; Laupacis, Andreas

2014-10-07

With increasing emphasis among health care providers and funders on patient-centered care, it follows that patients and their caregivers should be included when priorities for research are being established. This study sought to identify the most important unanswered questions about the management of kidney failure from the perspective of adult patients on or nearing dialysis, their caregivers, and the health care professionals who care for these patients. Research uncertainties were identified through a national Canadian survey of adult patients on or nearing dialysis, their caregivers, and health care professionals. Uncertainties were refined by a steering committee that included patients, caregivers, researchers, and clinicians to assemble a short-list of the top 30 uncertainties. Thirty-four people (11 patients; five caregivers; eight physicians; six nurses; and one social worker, pharmacist, physiotherapist, and dietitian each) from across Canada subsequently participated in a workshop to determine the top 10 research questions. In total, 1570 usable research uncertainties were received from 317 respondents to the survey. Among these, 259 unique uncertainties were identified; after ranking, these were reduced to a short-list of 30 uncertainties. During the in-person workshop, the top 10 research uncertainties were identified, which included questions about enhanced communication among patients and providers, dialysis modality options, itching, access to kidney transplantation, heart health, dietary restrictions, depression, and vascular access. These can be used alongside the results of other research priority-setting exercises to guide researchers in designing future studies and inform health care funders. Copyright © 2014 by the American Society of Nephrology.

Setting research priorities by applying the combined approach matrix.

PubMed

Ghaffar, Abdul

2009-04-01

Priority setting in health research is a dynamic process. Different organizations and institutes have been working in the field of research priority setting for many years. In 1999 the Global Forum for Health Research presented a research priority setting tool called the Combined Approach Matrix or CAM. Since its development, the CAM has been successfully applied to set research priorities for diseases, conditions and programmes at global, regional and national levels. This paper briefly explains the CAM methodology and how it could be applied in different settings, giving examples and describing challenges encountered in the process of setting research priorities and providing recommendations for further work in this field. The construct and design of the CAM is explained along with different steps needed, including planning and organization of a priority-setting exercise and how it could be applied in different settings. The application of the CAM are described by using three examples. The first concerns setting research priorities for a global programme, the second describes application at the country level and the third setting research priorities for diseases. Effective application of the CAM in different and diverse environments proves its utility as a tool for setting research priorities. Potential challenges encountered in the process of research priority setting are discussed and some recommendations for further work in this field are provided.

Establishing national priorities for Australian occupational health and safety research.

PubMed

Smith, Derek R

2010-01-01

This study aimed to identify current and emerging issues relevant to Occupational Health & Safety (OHS) research in Australia, and to formulate strategic research directions and strategies for the future. A national research forum was held which included leading OHS academics, employer and employee representative groups, as well as executives from state (New South Wales) and national (Safe Work Australia) representative bodies. A modified Delphi technique was used for collecting data in three phases. When ranked according to group consensus, the top three priorities for future OHS research in Australia were identified as being psychosocial and soft tissue injury hazards, work/life issues, and the impact of multiple, long-term exposures. Strategies to enhance collaboration despite limited research funding included the need to focus on complementary skills, to make the best use of Safe Work Australia's role (particularly to link with strategic and operational plans), and to foster closer engagement with research communities. While certain research priorities appear to be similar to those of other countries, the current study did identify some unique characteristics within an Australian context. High quality investigations of these issues should now be considered, in conjunction with greater cooperation between governments, regulators, employers and employee groups for the more effective facilitation of applied OHS research in the coming years.

Final priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Research Fellowships Program (also known as the Mary E. Switzer Research Fellowships). Final priority.

PubMed

2014-07-28

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Research Fellowships Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this notice announces a priority for a Distinguished Residential Disability and Rehabilitation Policy Fellowship. We take this action to focus attention on an area of national need. We intend the priority to build research capacity by providing support to highly qualified, experienced researchers, including those who are individuals with disabilities, to conduct policy research in the areas of disability and rehabilitation.

Developing a national dental education research strategy: priorities, barriers and enablers.

PubMed

Ajjawi, Rola; Barton, Karen L; Dennis, Ashley A; Rees, Charlotte E

2017-03-29

This study aimed to identify national dental education research (DER) priorities for the next 3-5 years and to identify barriers and enablers to DER. Scotland. In this two-stage online questionnaire study, we collected data with multiple dental professions (eg, dentistry, dental nursing and dental hygiene) and stakeholder groups (eg, learners, clinicians, educators, managers, researchers and academics). Eighty-five participants completed the Stage 1 qualitative questionnaire and 649 participants the Stage 2 quantitative questionnaire. Eight themes were identified at Stage 1. Of the 24 DER priorities identified, the top three were: role of assessments in identifying competence; undergraduate curriculum prepares for practice and promoting teamwork. Following exploratory factor analysis, the 24 items loaded onto four factors: teamwork and professionalism, measuring and enhancing performance, dental workforce issues and curriculum integration and innovation. Barriers and enablers existed at multiple levels: individual, interpersonal, institutional structures and cultures and technology. This priority setting exercise provides a necessary first step to developing a national DER strategy capturing multiple perspectives. Promoting DER requires improved resourcing alongside efforts to overcome peer stigma and lack of valuing and motivation. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention: a modified Delphi study

PubMed Central

Tanaka, Masako; Tomlinson, Mark; Streiner, David L; Tonmyr, Lil; Lee, Bandy X; Fisher, Jane; Hegadoren, Kathy; Pim, Joam Evans; Wang, Shr-Jie Sharlenna; MacMillan, Harriet L

2017-01-01

Abstract Objective To establish global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention using a systematic approach. Methods Research priorities were identified in a three-round process involving two surveys. In round 1, 95 global experts in violence prevention proposed research questions to be ranked in round 2. Questions were collated and organized according to the four-step public health approach to violence prevention. In round 2, 280 international experts ranked the importance of research in the four steps, and the various substeps, of the public health approach. In round 3, 131 international experts ranked the importance of detailed research questions on the public health step awarded the highest priority in round 2. Findings In round 2, “developing, implementing and evaluating interventions” was the step of the public health approach awarded the highest priority for four of the six types of violence considered (i.e. child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, armed violence and sexual violence) but not for youth violence or elder abuse. In contrast, “scaling up interventions and evaluating their cost–effectiveness” was ranked lowest for all types of violence. In round 3, research into “developing, implementing and evaluating interventions” that addressed parenting or laws to regulate the use of firearms was awarded the highest priority. The key limitations of the study were response and attrition rates among survey respondents. However, these rates were in line with similar priority-setting exercises. Conclusion These findings suggest it is premature to scale up violence prevention interventions. Developing and evaluating smaller-scale interventions should be the funding priority. PMID:28053363

Research priority setting in childhood chronic disease: a systematic review.

PubMed

Odgers, Harrison Lindsay; Tong, Allison; Lopez-Vargas, Pamela; Davidson, Andrew; Jaffe, Adam; McKenzie, Anne; Pinkerton, Ross; Wake, Melissa; Richmond, Peter; Crowe, Sally; Caldwell, Patrina Ha Yuen; Hill, Sophie; Couper, Jennifer; Haddad, Suzy; Kassai, Behrouz; Craig, Jonathan C

2018-04-11

To evaluate research priority setting approaches in childhood chronic diseases and to describe the priorities of stakeholders including patients, caregivers/families and health professionals. We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from inception to 16 October 2016. Studies that elicited stakeholder priorities for paediatric chronic disease research were eligible for inclusion. Data on the prioritisation process were extracted using an appraisal checklist. Generated priorities were collated into common topic areas. We identified 83 studies (n=15 722). Twenty (24%) studies involved parents/caregivers and four (5%) children. The top three health areas were cancer (11%), neurology (8%) and endocrine/metabolism (8%). Priority topic areas were treatment (78%), disease trajectory (48%), quality of life/psychosocial impact (48%), disease onset/prevention (43%), knowledge/self-management (33%), prevalence (30%), diagnostic methods (28%), access to healthcare (25%) and transition to adulthood (12%). The methods included workshops, Delphi techniques, surveys and focus groups/interviews. Specific methods for collecting and prioritising research topics were described in only 60% of studies. Most reviewed studies were conducted in high-income nations. Research priority setting activities in paediatric chronic disease cover many discipline areas and have elicited a broad range of topics. However, child/caregiver involvement is uncommon, and the methods often lack clarity. A systematic and explicit process that involves patients and families in partnership may help to inform a more patient and family-relevant research agenda in paediatric chronic disease. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Identifying priority areas for ecosystem service management in South African grasslands.

PubMed

Egoh, Benis N; Reyers, Belinda; Rouget, Mathieu; Richardson, David M

2011-06-01

Grasslands provide many ecosystem services required to support human well-being and are home to a diverse fauna and flora. Degradation of grasslands due to agriculture and other forms of land use threaten biodiversity and ecosystem services. Various efforts are underway around the world to stem these declines. The Grassland Programme in South Africa is one such initiative and is aimed at safeguarding both biodiversity and ecosystem services. As part of this developing programme, we identified spatial priority areas for ecosystem services, tested the effect of different target levels of ecosystem services used to identify priority areas, and evaluated whether biodiversity priority areas can be aligned with those for ecosystem services. We mapped five ecosystem services (below ground carbon storage, surface water supply, water flow regulation, soil accumulation and soil retention) and identified priority areas for individual ecosystem services and for all five services at the scale of quaternary catchments. Planning for individual ecosystem services showed that, depending on the ecosystem service of interest, between 4% and 13% of the grassland biome was required to conserve at least 40% of the soil and water services. Thirty-four percent of the biome was needed to conserve 40% of the carbon service in the grassland. Priority areas identified for five ecosystem services under three target levels (20%, 40%, 60% of the total amount) showed that between 17% and 56% of the grassland biome was needed to conserve these ecosystem services. There was moderate to high overlap between priority areas selected for ecosystem services and already-identified terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity priority areas. This level of overlap coupled with low irreplaceability values obtained when planning for individual ecosystem services makes it possible to combine biodiversity and ecosystem services in one plan using systematic conservation planning. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All

Research priorities for Chagas disease, human African trypanosomiasis and leishmaniasis.

PubMed

2012-01-01

This report provides a review and analysis of the research landscape for three diseases - Chagas disease, human African trypanosomiasis and leishmaniasis - that disproportionately afflict poor and remote populations with limited access to health services. It represents the work of the disease reference group on Chagas Disease, Human African Trypanosomiasis and Leishmaniasis (DRG3) which was established to identify key research priorities through review of research evidence and input from stakeholders' consultations. The diseases, which are caused by related protozoan parasites, are described in terms of their epidemiology and diseases burden, clinical forms and pathogenesis, HIV coinfection, diagnosis, drugs and drug resistance, vaccines, vector control, and health-care interventions. Priority areas for research are identified based on criteria such as public health relevance, benefit and impact on poor populations and equity, and feasibility. The priorities are found in the areas of diagnostics, drugs, vector control, asymptomatic infection, economic analysis of treatment and vector control methods, and in some specific issues such as surveillance methods or transmission-blocking vaccines for particular diseases. This report will be useful to researchers, policy and decision-makers, funding bodies, implementation organizations, and civil society. This is one of ten disease and thematic reference group reports that have come out of the TDR Think Tank, all of which have contributed to the development of the Global Report for Research on Infectious Diseases of Poverty, available at: www.who.int/tdr/stewardship/global_report/en/index.html.

Final priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Final priority.

PubMed

2013-06-14

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Universal Interfaces and Information Technology Access under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for a competition in fiscal year (FY) 2013 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on areas of national need. We intend to use this priority to improve outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

Do different stakeholder groups share mental health research priorities? A four-arm Delphi study.

PubMed

Owens, Christabel; Ley, Ann; Aitken, Peter

2008-12-01

Despite considerable investment in research priority setting within diverse fields of healthcare, little is known about the extent to which different stakeholder groups share research priorities. Conflicting priorities may jeopardize stakeholder engagement in research. To identify the research priorities of different stakeholder groups within mental health care and examine the extent and nature of agreement between them. Using a Delphi technique, we conducted parallel consultation processes within four different stakeholder groups. Each group process consisted of three rounds. The study was carried out within a mental health and learning disabilities trust in southern England. Participants were recruited from the following groups: mental health service users (34), informal carers (26), mental health practitioners (35) and service managers (23). There were striking differences between the four groups in respect of their ability and willingness to make priority decisions. These differences notwithstanding, there was considerable overlap in respect of their research interests. All groups identified and attached high importance to issues relating to the promotion of independence, self-esteem and recovery. The quality of in-patient care, the place of psychological therapies and the relationship between physical and mental health also emerged across the board. The confluence of four different stakeholder groups around a number of clear themes is highly encouraging, providing a framework within which to construct a research agenda and suggesting that mental health research can be built on solid partnerships.

Research priorities in health communication and participation: international survey of consumers and other stakeholders

PubMed Central

Bragge, Peter; Lowe, Dianne; Nunn, Jack S; O’Sullivan, Molly; Horvat, Lidia; Tong, Allison; Kay, Debra; Ghersi, Davina; McDonald, Steve; Poole, Naomi; Bourke, Noni; Lannin, Natasha; Vadasz, Danny; Oliver, Sandy; Carey, Karen; Hill, Sophie J

2018-01-01

Objective To identify research priorities of consumers and other stakeholders to inform Cochrane Reviews in ‘health communication and participation’ (including such concepts as patient experience, shared decision-making and health literacy). Setting International. Participants We included anyone with an interest in health communication and participation. Up to 151 participants (18–80 years; 117 female) across 12 countries took part, including 48 consumers (patients, carers, consumer representatives) and 75 professionals (health professionals, policymakers, researchers) (plus 25 people who identified as both). Design Survey. Methods We invited people to submit their research ideas via an online survey open for 4 weeks. Using inductive thematic analysis, we generated priority research topics, then classified these into broader themes. Results Participants submitted 200 research ideas, which we grouped into 21 priority topics. Key research priorities included: insufficient consumer involvement in research (19 responses), ‘official’ health information is contradictory and hard to understand (18 responses), communication/coordination breakdowns in health services (15 responses), health information provision a low priority for health professionals (15 responses), insufficient eliciting of patient preferences (14 responses), health services poorly understand/implement patient-centred care (14 responses), lack of holistic care impacting healthcare quality and safety (13 responses) and inadequate consumer involvement in service design (11 responses). These priorities encompassed acute and community health settings, with implications for policy and research. Priority populations of interest included people from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, carers, and people with low educational attainment, or mental illness. Most frequently suggested interventions focused on training and cultural change activities for health services and health professionals

Research priorities for multi-institutional collaborative research in surgical education.

PubMed

Stefanidis, Dimitrios; Cochran, Amalia; Sevdalis, Nick; Mellinger, John; Phitayakorn, Roy; Sullivan, Maura; Barney, Linda

2015-01-01

Research in surgical education has seen unprecedented growth but originates from single institutions and remains uncoordinated; this study aimed to generate a list of research priorities in surgical educational topics. The membership of the Association for Surgical Education was asked to submit up to 5 research questions concerned with multi-institutional collaborative surgical education research and to identify challenges faced by surgical education researchers. A modified Delphi methodology was used to create the research agenda based on these responses. Surgical educators responded to 3 survey rounds. Categories of submitted questions included teaching methods and curriculum development; assessment and competency; simulation; medical student preparation and selection; impact of work hour restrictions; and faculty development. Participants cited institutional culture and practice variability and lack of institutional review board coordination as common barriers to collaborative research, while identifying extensive planning, frequent communication, and availability of dedicated research coordinators as the most important facilitators. Using a Delphi methodology, a prioritized agenda for multi-institutional surgical education research was developed that may help advance surgeon education. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Research priorities in Maternal, Newborn, & Child Health & Nutrition for India: An Indian Council of Medical Research-INCLEN Initiative.

PubMed

Arora, Narendra K; Swaminathan, Soumya; Mohapatra, Archisman; Gopalan, Hema S; Katoch, Vishwa M; Bhan, Maharaj K; Rasaily, Reeta; Shekhar, Chander; Thavaraj, Vasantha; Roy, Malabika; Das, Manoja K; Wazny, Kerri; Kumar, Rakesh; Khera, Ajay; Bhatla, Neerja; Jain, Vanita; Laxmaiah, Avula; Nair, M K C; Paul, Vinod K; Ramachandran, Prema; Ramji, Siddharth; Vaidya, Umesh; Verma, I C; Shah, Dheeraj; Bahl, Rajiv; Qazi, Shamim; Rudan, Igor; Black, Robert E

2017-05-01

In India, research prioritization in Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health and Nutrition (MNCHN) themes has traditionally involved only a handful of experts mostly from major cities. The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-INCLEN collaboration undertook a nationwide exercise engaging faculty from 256 institutions to identify top research priorities in the MNCHN themes for 2016-2025. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method of priority setting was adapted. The context of the exercise was defined by a National Steering Group (NSG) and guided by four Thematic Research Subcommittees. Research ideas were pooled from 498 experts located in different parts of India, iteratively consolidated into research options, scored by 893 experts against five pre-defined criteria (answerability, relevance, equity, investment and innovation) and weighed by a larger reference group. Ranked lists of priorities were generated for each of the four themes at national and three subnational (regional) levels [Empowered Action Group & North-Eastern States, Southern and Western States, & Northern States (including West Bengal)]. Research priorities differed between regions and from overall national priorities. Delivery domain of research which included implementation research constituted about 70 per cent of the top ten research options under all four themes. The results were endorsed in the NSG meeting. There was unanimity that the research priorities should be considered by different governmental and non-governmental agencies for investment with prioritization on implementation research and issues cutting across themes.

Research priorities in Maternal, Newborn, & Child Health & Nutrition for India: An Indian Council of Medical Research-INCLEN Initiative

PubMed Central

Arora, Narendra K.; Swaminathan, Soumya; Mohapatra, Archisman; Gopalan, Hema S.; Katoch, Vishwa M.; Bhan, Maharaj K.; Rasaily, Reeta; Shekhar, Chander; Thavaraj, Vasantha; Roy, Malabika; Das, Manoja K.; Wazny, Kerri; Kumar, Rakesh; Khera, Ajay; Bhatla, Neerja; Jain, Vanita; Laxmaiah, Avula; Nair, M.K.C.; Paul, Vinod K.; Ramachandran, Prema; Ramji, Siddharth; Vaidya, Umesh; Verma, I.C.; Shah, Dheeraj; Bahl, Rajiv; Qazi, Shamim; Rudan, Igor; Black, Robert E.

2017-01-01

In India, research prioritization in Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health and Nutrition (MNCHN) themes has traditionally involved only a handful of experts mostly from major cities. The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-INCLEN collaboration undertook a nationwide exercise engaging faculty from 256 institutions to identify top research priorities in the MNCHN themes for 2016-2025. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method of priority setting was adapted. The context of the exercise was defined by a National Steering Group (NSG) and guided by four Thematic Research Subcommittees. Research ideas were pooled from 498 experts located in different parts of India, iteratively consolidated into research options, scored by 893 experts against five pre-defined criteria (answerability, relevance, equity, investment and innovation) and weighed by a larger reference group. Ranked lists of priorities were generated for each of the four themes at national and three subnational (regional) levels [Empowered Action Group & North-Eastern States, Southern and Western States, & Northern States (including West Bengal)]. Research priorities differed between regions and from overall national priorities. Delivery domain of research which included implementation research constituted about 70 per cent of the top ten research options under all four themes. The results were endorsed in the NSG meeting. There was unanimity that the research priorities should be considered by different governmental and non-governmental agencies for investment with prioritization on implementation research and issues cutting across themes. PMID:28948951

Priorities in pediatric epilepsy research: improving children's futures today.

PubMed

Berg, Anne T; Baca, Christine B; Loddenkemper, Tobias; Vickrey, Barbara G; Dlugos, Dennis

2013-09-24

The Priorities in Pediatric Epilepsy Research workshop was held in the spirit of patient-centered and patient-driven mandates for developing best practices in care, particularly for epilepsy beginning under age 3 years. The workshop brought together parents, representatives of voluntary advocacy organizations, physicians, allied health professionals, researchers, and administrators to identify priority areas for pediatric epilepsy care and research including implementation and testing of interventions designed to improve care processes and outcomes. Priorities highlighted were 1) patient outcomes, especially seizure control but also behavioral, academic, and social functioning; 2) early and accurate diagnosis and optimal treatment; 3) role and involvement of parents (communication and shared decision-making); and 4) integration of school and community organizations with epilepsy care delivery. Key factors influencing pediatric epilepsy care included the child's impairments and seizure presentation, parents, providers, the health care system, and community systems. Care was represented as a sequential process from initial onset of seizures to referral for comprehensive evaluation when needed. We considered an alternative model in which comprehensive care would be utilized from onset, proactively, rather than reactively after pharmacoresistance became obvious. Barriers, including limited levels of evidence about many aspects of diagnosis and management, access to care--particularly epilepsy specialty and behavioral health care--and implementation, were identified. Progress hinges on coordinated research efforts that systematically address gaps in knowledge and overcoming barriers to access and implementation. The stakes are considerable, and the potential benefits for reduced burden of refractory epilepsy and lifelong disabilities may be enormous.

Hypertension management research priorities from patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers: A report from the Hypertension Canada Priority Setting Partnership Group.

PubMed

Khan, Nadia; Bacon, Simon L; Khan, Samia; Perlmutter, Sara; Gerlinsky, Carline; Dermer, Mark; Johnson, Lonni; Alves, Finderson; McLean, Donna; Laupacis, Andreas; Pui, Mandy; Berg, Angelique; Flowitt, Felicia

2017-11-01

Patient- and stakeholder-oriented research is vital to improving the relevance of research. The authors aimed to identify the 10 most important research priorities of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers (family physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, pharmacists, and dietitians) for hypertension management. Using the James Lind Alliance approach, a national web-based survey asked patients, caregivers, and care providers to submit their unanswered questions on hypertension management. Questions already answered from randomized controlled trial evidence were removed. A priority setting process of patient, caregiver, and healthcare providers then ranked the final top 10 research priorities in an in-person meeting. There were 386 respondents who submitted 598 questions after exclusions. Of the respondents, 78% were patients or caregivers, 29% lived in rural areas, 78% were aged 50 to 80 years, and 75% were women. The 598 questions were distilled to 42 unique questions and from this list, the top 10 research questions prioritized included determining the combinations of healthy lifestyle modifications to reduce the need for antihypertensive medications, stress management interventions, evaluating treatment strategies based on out-of-office blood pressure compared with conventional (office) blood pressure, education tools and technologies to improve patient motivation and health behavior change, management strategies for ethnic groups, evaluating natural and alternative treatments, and the optimal role of different healthcare providers and caregivers in supporting patients with hypertension. These priorities can be used to guide clinicians, researchers, and funding bodies on areas that are a high priority for hypertension management research for patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. This also highlights priority areas for improved knowledge translation and delivering patient-centered care. ©2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Isocyanates and human health: multistakeholder information needs and research priorities.

PubMed

Lockey, James E; Redlich, Carrie A; Streicher, Robert; Pfahles-Hutchens, Andrea; Hakkinen, Pertti Bert J; Ellison, Gary L; Harber, Philip; Utell, Mark; Holland, John; Comai, Andrew; White, Marc

2015-01-01

To outline the knowledge gaps and research priorities identified by a broad base of stakeholders involved in the planning and participation of an international conference and research agenda workshop on isocyanates and human health held in Potomac, Maryland, in April 2013. A multimodal iterative approach was used for data collection including preconference surveys, review of a 2001 consensus conference on isocyanates, oral and poster presentations, focused break-out sessions, panel discussions, and postconference research agenda workshop. Participants included representatives of consumer and worker health, health professionals, regulatory agencies, academic and industry scientists, labor, and trade associations. Recommendations were summarized regarding knowledge gaps and research priorities in the following areas: worker and consumer exposures; toxicology, animal models, and biomarkers; human cancer risk; environmental exposure and monitoring; and respiratory epidemiology and disease, and occupational health surveillance.

Setting the top 10 research priorities to improve the health of people with Type 2 diabetes: a Diabetes UK-James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Finer, S; Robb, P; Cowan, K; Daly, A; Shah, K; Farmer, A

2018-07-01

To describe processes and outcomes of a priority setting partnership to identify the 'top 10 research priorities' in Type 2 diabetes, involving people living with the condition, their carers, and healthcare professionals. We followed the four-step James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process which involved: gathering uncertainties using a questionnaire survey distributed to 70 000 people living with Type 2 diabetes and their carers, and healthcare professionals; organizing the uncertainties; interim priority setting by resampling of participants with a second survey; and final priority setting in an independent group of participants, using the nominal group technique. At each step the steering group closely monitored and guided the process. In the first survey, 8227 uncertainties were proposed by 2587 participants, of whom 18% were from black, Asian and minority ethnic groups. Uncertainties were formatted and collated into 114 indicative questions. A total of 1506 people contributed to a second survey, generating a shortlist of 24 questions equally weighted to the contributions of people living with diabetes and their carers and those of healthcare professionals. In the final step the 'top 10 research priorities' were selected, including questions on cure and reversal, risk identification and prevention, and self-management approaches in Type 2 diabetes. Systematic and transparent methodology was used to identify research priorities in a large and genuine partnership of people with lived and professional experience of Type 2 diabetes. The top 10 questions represent consensus areas of research priority to guide future research, deliver responsive and strategic allocation of research resources, and improve the future health and well-being of people living with, and at risk of, Type 2 diabetes. © 2018 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.

Identifying priorities for improving rear seat occupant protection.

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2009-03-01

This project helped to identify priorities for improving the safety of rear seat occupants through a literature review and NASS-CDS injury analysis. The literature review covers injury patterns of rear seat occupants, new safety technologies intended...

European research priorities for intracerebral haemorrhage.

PubMed

Steiner, Thorsten; Petersson, Jesper; Al-Shahi Salman, Rustam; Christensen, Hanne; Cordonnier, Charlotte; Csiba, Laszlo; Harnof, Sagi; Krieger, Derk; Mendelow, David; Molina, Carlos; Montaner, Joan; Overgaard, Karsten; Roine, Risto O; Schmutzhard, Erich; Tatlisumak, Turgut; Toni, Danilo; Stapf, Christian

2011-01-01

Over 2 million people are affected by intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) worldwide every year, one third of them dying within 1 month, and many survivors being left with permanent disability. Unlike most other stroke types, the incidence, morbidity and mortality of ICH have not declined over time. No standardised diagnostic workup for the detection of the various underlying causes of ICH currently exists, and the evidence for medical or surgical therapeutic interventions remains limited. A dedicated European research programme for ICH is needed to identify ways to reduce the burden of ICH-related death and disability. The European Research Network on Intracerebral Haemorrhage EURONICH is a multidisciplinary academic research collaboration that has been established to define current research priorities and to conduct large clinical studies on all aspects of ICH. Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Comparison of national health research priority-setting methods and characteristics in Latin America and the Caribbean, 2002-2012.

PubMed

Reveiz, Ludovic; Elias, Vanessa; Terry, Robert F; Alger, Jackeline; Becerra-Posada, Francisco

2013-07-01

To compare health research priority-setting methods and characteristics among countries in Latin America and the Caribbean during 2002 - 2012. This was a systematic review that identified national health research policies and priority agendas through a search of ministry and government databases related to health care institutions. PubMed, LILACS, the Health Research Web, and others were searched for the period from January 2002 - February 2012. The study excluded research organized by governmental institutions and specific national strategies on particular disease areas. Priority-setting methods were compared to the "nine common themes for good practice in health research priorities." National health research priorities were compared to those of the World Health Organization's Millennium Development Goals (MDG). Of the 18 Latin American countries assessed, 13 had documents that established national health research priorities; plus the Caribbean Health Research Council had a research agenda for its 19 constituents. These 14 total reports varied widely in terms of objectives, content, dissemination, and implementation; most provided a list of strategic areas, suggestions, and/or sub-priorities for each country; however, few proposed specific research topics and questions. Future reports could be improved by including more details on the comprehensive approach employed to identify priorities, on the information gathering process, and on practices to be undertaken after priorities are set. There is a need for improving the quality of the methodologies utilized and coordinating Regional efforts as countries strive to meet the MDG.

What should autism research focus upon? Community views and priorities from the United Kingdom

PubMed Central

Dinsmore, Adam; Charman, Tony

2014-01-01

The rise in the measured prevalence of autism has been accompanied by much new research and research investment internationally. This study sought to establish whether the pattern of current UK autism research funding maps on to the concerns of the autism community. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with autistic adults, family members, practitioners and researchers to identify their priorities for research. We also captured the views of a large number of stakeholders via an online survey. There was a clear disparity between the United Kingdom’s pattern of funding for autism research and the priorities articulated by the majority of participants. There was general consensus that future priorities for autism research should lie in those areas that make a difference to people’s day-to-day lives. There needs to be greater involvement of the autism community both in priority setting and in research more broadly to ensure that resources reach where they are most needed and can make the most impact. PMID:24789871

[Priorities for health policy and systems research focused on human resources in health].

PubMed

Reveiz, Ludovic; Chapman, Evelina; Flórez, Carlos E Pinzón; Torres, Rubén

2013-11-01

Identify priorities for health policy and systems research related to human resources in Latin America and Caribbean countries. An online survey was designed based on a search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and LILACS that contributed previously prioritized research questions. Respondents, mainly researchers and decision-makers, were identified through various sources. The first round, directed at researchers, aimed at refining and adding research questions and prioritizing questions that researchers regarded as relevant or very relevant. The second round was directed at researchers and decision-makers. A question was considered a priority when 50% (or more) of respondents described it as "relevant" or "very relevant." The first round included 20 questions on human resources and 33/66 researchers responded. Questions suggested by the researchers were added, resulting in 26 questions for the second round, which were sent to 121 researchers and decision-makers. Respondent representation by country was uniform in both rounds. In the second round, 14/26 (54%) questions were described as very relevant. Priority issues related to regulation of the market, integration of education and health care needs, and distribution of human resources. The response rate was 50% in the first round (33/66), and 34% in the second round (41/121). The results of this exercise provide a starting point for mobilization of resources for health policy and systems research. Identification of health systems research priorities is an effective and efficient strategy for reorienting political, financial, management, and social organization efforts for attaining universal health coverage.

Research priorities in medical education: A national study.

PubMed

Tootoonchi, Mina; Yamani, Nikoo; Changiz, Tahereh; Yousefy, Alireza

2012-01-01

One preliminary step to strengthen medical education research would be determining the research priorities. The aim of this study was to determine the research priorities of medical education in Iran in 2007-2008. This descriptive study was carried out in two phases. Phase one was performed in 3 stages and used Delphi technique among academic staffs of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. The three stages included a brainstorming workshop for 140 faculty members and educational experts resulting in a list of research priorities, then, in the second and third stages 99 and 76 questionnaires were distributed among faculty members. In the second phase, the final questionnaires were mailed to educational research center managers of universities type I, II and III, and were distributed among 311 academic members and educational experts to rate the items on a numerical scale ranging from 1 to 10. The most important research priorities included faculty members' development methods, faculty members' motives, satisfaction and welfare, criteria and procedures of faculty members' promotion, teaching methods and learning techniques, job descriptions and professional skills of graduates, quality management in education, second language, clinical education, science production in medicine, faculty evaluation and information technology. This study shows the medial education research priorities in national level and in different types of medical universities in Iran. It is recommended that faculty members and research administrators consider the needs and requirements of education and plan the researches in education according to these priorities.

Research priorities in medical education: A national study

PubMed Central

Tootoonchi, Mina; Yamani, Nikoo; Changiz, Tahereh; Yousefy, Alireza

2012-01-01

BACKGROUND: One preliminary step to strengthen medical education research would be determining the research priorities. The aim of this study was to determine the research priorities of medical education in Iran in 2007-2008. METHODS: This descriptive study was carried out in two phases. Phase one was performed in 3 stages and used Delphi technique among academic staffs of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. The three stages included a brainstorming workshop for 140 faculty members and educational experts resulting in a list of research priorities, then, in the second and third stages 99 and 76 questionnaires were distributed among faculty members. In the second phase, the final questionnaires were mailed to educational research center managers of universities type I, II and III, and were distributed among 311 academic members and educational experts to rate the items on a numerical scale ranging from 1 to 10. RESULTS: The most important research priorities included faculty members’ development methods, faculty members’ motives, satisfaction and welfare, criteria and procedures of faculty members’ promotion, teaching methods and learning techniques, job descriptions and professional skills of graduates, quality management in education, second language, clinical education, science production in medicine, faculty evaluation and information technology. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the medial education research priorities in national level and in different types of medical universities in Iran. It is recommended that faculty members and research administrators consider the needs and requirements of education and plan the researches in education according to these priorities. PMID:23248661

Research Priorities for the Intersection of Alcohol and HIV/AIDS in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Priority Setting Exercise.

PubMed

Gordon, Sara; Rotheram-Borus, Mary Jane; Skeen, Sarah; Perry, Charles; Bryant, Kendall; Tomlinson, Mark

2017-11-01

The harmful use of alcohol is a component cause for more than 200 diseases. The association between alcohol consumption, risk taking behavior and a range of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS is well established. The prevalence of HIV/AIDS as well as harmful alcohol use in low and middle income countries is high. Alcohol has been identified as a modifiable risk factor in the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS. The objective of this paper is to define research priorities for the interaction of alcohol and HIV/AIDS in low and middle income countries. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) priority setting methodology was applied in order to assess research priorities of the interaction of alcohol and HIV/AIDS. A group of 171 global and local experts in the field of alcohol and or HIV/AIDS related research were identified and invited to generate research questions. This resulted in 205 research questions which have been categorized and refined by senior researchers into 48 research questions to be evaluated using five criteria: answerability, effectiveness, feasibility, applicability and impact, as well as equity. A total of 59 experts participated independently in the voluntary scoring exercise (a 34% response rate). There was substantial consensus among experts on priorities for research on alcohol and HIV. These tended to break down into two categories, those focusing on better understanding the nexus between alcohol and HIV and those directed towards informing practical interventions to reduce the impact of alcohol use on HIV treatment outcomes, which replicates what Bryant (Subst Use Misuse 41:1465-1507, 2006) and Parry et al. (Addiction 108:1-2, 2012) found. Responses from experts were stratified by location in order to determine any differences between groups. On average experts in the LMIC gave higher scores than the HIC experts. Recent research has shown the causal link between alcohol consumption and the incidence of HIV

Does Funding for Arctic Research Align with Research Priorities and Policy Needs? Trends in the USA, Canada and Europe

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Murray, M. S.; Ibarguchi, G.; Rajdev, V.

2015-12-01

Over the past twenty years, increasing awareness and understanding of changes in the Arctic system, the stated desires of Arctic Peoples to be engaged in the research process, and a growing international interest in the region's resources have informed various stakeholders to undertake many Arctic science planning activities. Some examples of science planning include priority-setting for research, knowledge translation, stakeholder engagement, improved coordination, and international collaboration. The International Study of Arctic Change recently initiated an analysis of the extent to which alignment exists among stated science priorities, recognized societal needs, and funding patterns of the major North American and European agencies. In this paper, we present a decade of data on international funding patterns and data on two decades of science planning. We discuss whether funding patterns reflect the priority research questions and identified needs for information that are articulated in a myriad of Arctic research planning documents. The alignment in many areas remains poor, bringing into question the purpose of large-scale science planning if it does not lead to funding of those priorities identified by Arctic stakeholder communities (scientists, Arctic Peoples, planners, policy makers, the private sector, and others).

Global health trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise.

PubMed

Rosala-Hallas, Anna; Bhangu, Aneel; Blazeby, Jane; Bowman, Louise; Clarke, Mike; Lang, Trudie; Nasser, Mona; Siegfried, Nandi; Soares-Weiser, Karla; Sydes, Matt R; Wang, Duolao; Zhang, Junhua; Williamson, Paula R

2018-02-05

Methodological research into the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of trials is essential to optimise the process. UK specialists in the field have established a set of top priorities in aid of this research. These priorities, however, may not be reflected in the needs of similar research in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) with different healthcare provision, resources and research infrastructure. The aim of the study was to identify the top priorities for methodological research in LMICs to inform further research and ultimately to improve clinical trials in these regions. An online, two-round survey was conducted from December 2016 to April 2017 amongst researchers and methodologists working on trials in LMICs. The first round required participants to suggest between three and six topics which they felt were priorities for trial methodological research in LMICs. The second round invited participants to grade the importance of a compulsory list of topics suggested by four or more individuals, and an optional list of the remaining topics. Rounds 1 and 2 were completed by 412 and 314 participants, respectively. A wide spread of years of experience, discipline, current country of residence, origin of trials training and area of involvement in trials was reported. The topics deemed most important for methodological research were: choosing appropriate outcomes to measure and training of research staff. By presenting these top priorities we have the foundations of a global health trials methodological research agenda which we hope will foster future research in specific areas in order to increase and improve trials in LMICs.

Consensus recommendations for cancer rehabilitation: research and education priorities

PubMed Central

McEwen, S.; Egan, M.; Chasen, M.; Fitch, M.

2013-01-01

As cancer survivorship increases, there is a need for additional and more complex rehabilitation services. The Partners in Cancer Rehabilitation Research group held a 3-day invitational working meeting aimed at defining the state of the science in cancer rehabilitation research and identifying key areas for development of research and education. In May 2012, 29 participants gathered to present their current work, review a synthesis of the current literature, generate ideas about research and education gaps, and develop consensus on priority areas. The conclusion of the meeting was that a main research priority is to develop and test personalized rehabilitation interventions and brief measures to identify the presence and severity of disabling sequelae. The education consensus statement concluded that a clear description of cancer rehabilitation and its mandate should be developed as a precursor to education activities, including both a conceptualization of complex interdisciplinary rehabilitation and the roles of individual professions, and further, that there is a great need to increase awareness among health professionals, patients, and families of the need for and general effectiveness of cancer rehabilitation. Numerous specific recommendations were also put forward, and it is hoped that those recommendations will provide the foundation for a new and productive era of research and will play a role in the improvement of functional health and participation outcomes for cancer survivors.

Setting Priorities for Gerontological Social Work Research: A National Delphi Study

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Burnette, Denise; Morrow-Howell, Nancy; Chen, Li-Mei

2003-01-01

Purpose: An increasingly important task for all disciplines involved in aging research is to identify and prioritize areas for investigation. This article reports the results of a national Delphi study on setting research priorities for gerontological social work. Design and Methods: Delphi methodology, a structured process for eliciting and…

Chartered Society of Physiotherapy's identification of national research priorities for physiotherapy using a modified Delphi technique.

PubMed

Rankin, Gabrielle; Rushton, Alison; Olver, Pat; Moore, Ann

2012-09-01

To define research priorities to strategically inform the evidence base for physiotherapy practice. A modified Delphi method using SurveyMonkey software identified priorities for physiotherapy research through national consensus. An iterative process of three rounds provided feedback. Round 1 requested five priorities using pre-defined prioritisation criteria. Content analysis identified research themes and topics. Round 2 requested rating of the importance of the research topics using a 1-5 Likert scale. Round 3 requested a further process of rating. Quantitative and qualitative data informed decision-making. Level of consensus was established as mean rating ≥ 3.5, coefficient of variation ≤ 30%, and ≥ 55% agreement. Consensus across participants was evaluated using Kendall's W. Four expert panels (n=40-61) encompassing a range of stakeholders and reflecting four core areas of physiotherapy practice were established by steering groups (n=204 participants overall). Response rates of 53-78% across three rounds were good. The identification of 24/185 topics for musculoskeletal, 43/174 for neurology, 30/120 for cardiorespiratory and medical rehabilitation, and 30/113 for mental and physical health and wellbeing as priorities demonstrated discrimination of the process. Consensus between participants was good for most topics. Measurement validity of the research topics was good. The involvement of multiple stakeholders as participants ensured the current context of the intended use of the priorities. From a process of national consensus involving key stakeholders, including service users, physiotherapy research topics have been identified and prioritised. Setting priorities provides a vision of how research can contribute to the developing research base in physiotherapy to maximise focus. Copyright © 2012 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Research priorities in health communication and participation: international survey of consumers and other stakeholders.

PubMed

Synnot, Anneliese; Bragge, Peter; Lowe, Dianne; Nunn, Jack S; O'Sullivan, Molly; Horvat, Lidia; Tong, Allison; Kay, Debra; Ghersi, Davina; McDonald, Steve; Poole, Naomi; Bourke, Noni; Lannin, Natasha; Vadasz, Danny; Oliver, Sandy; Carey, Karen; Hill, Sophie J

2018-05-08

To identify research priorities of consumers and other stakeholders to inform Cochrane Reviews in 'health communication and participation' (including such concepts as patient experience, shared decision-making and health literacy). International. We included anyone with an interest in health communication and participation. Up to 151 participants (18-80 years; 117 female) across 12 countries took part, including 48 consumers (patients, carers, consumer representatives) and 75 professionals (health professionals, policymakers, researchers) (plus 25 people who identified as both). Survey. We invited people to submit their research ideas via an online survey open for 4 weeks. Using inductive thematic analysis, we generated priority research topics, then classified these into broader themes. Participants submitted 200 research ideas, which we grouped into 21 priority topics. Key research priorities included: insufficient consumer involvement in research (19 responses), 'official' health information is contradictory and hard to understand (18 responses), communication/coordination breakdowns in health services (15 responses), health information provision a low priority for health professionals (15 responses), insufficient eliciting of patient preferences (14 responses), health services poorly understand/implement patient-centred care (14 responses), lack of holistic care impacting healthcare quality and safety (13 responses) and inadequate consumer involvement in service design (11 responses). These priorities encompassed acute and community health settings, with implications for policy and research. Priority populations of interest included people from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, carers, and people with low educational attainment, or mental illness. Most frequently suggested interventions focused on training and cultural change activities for health services and health professionals. Consumers and other stakeholders want research addressing

Determining research priorities for adolescent and young adult cancer in Australia.

PubMed

Medlow, S; Patterson, P

2015-07-01

The Australian Youth Cancer Service (YCS) is part of a growing international movement to provide advocacy and better targeted health-care services for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer. One of the key initiatives of the YCS is to determine and implement priorities within Australian AYA cancer research. The YCS used the value-weighting online survey technique of allocating 100 hypothetical units of funding across pre-determined topics of research in order to determine Australian consumers' and health professionals' AYA cancer research priorities. A total of 101 participants (26 consumers and 75 health professionals) took part in the online survey. Biomedical and Clinical Medicine Research was allocated the greatest proportion of available funding. A number of priority populations were also identified, although these were distributed across pre-treatment and post-treatment stages. The preferences of consumers and health professionals to invest available AYA cancer research funds in Biomedical and Clinical Medicine Research will be an important consideration in guiding the Australian YCS decision-making process in the immediate future. 'Prevention, screening and early detection' was also an important research funding target, along with survivorship populations. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Research priorities in occupational safety and health: a review.

PubMed

Iavicoli, Sergio; Rondinone, Bruna; Marinaccio, Alessandro; Fingerhut, Marilyn

2006-01-01

Changes in the world of work in the last few decades have markedly affected questions regarding occupational safety and health (OSH). Jobs in our economy continue to shift from manufacturing to services. Longer hours, shift work, reduced job security, temporary work are realities in the modern workplace, new chemicals, materials, processes are developed at an ever accelerating pace. The workforce is also changing. It will become older and more racially diverse and women are increasing. These changes present new challenges to protect worker safety and health and it was been indispensable to redefine priorities, by consulting all those involved in OSH. The present study therefore made a critical comparative analysis of the main published projects to identify research priorities in the OSH field, comparing methods, approaches and results. Comparison of the priority areas established in each of these studies is inherently difficult due to differences in socio-cultural backgrounds, in the methods employed to identify priority topics, and the many factors involved. However, it is clear that the Delphi technique is widely used as a reliable method, in that it covers a broad range of qualified witnesses, from a variety of backgrounds--such as trade union representatives and researchers--providing different viewpoints. It also takes account of the intrinsic features of OSH which--compared to other disciplines--involves multidisciplinary factors calling into play a range of scientific settings, such as toxicologists, molecular biologists, epidemiologists, occupational hygienists and occupational physicians. This analysis showed how important it is to reach consensus among all those operating in the OSH sector, in order to establish standard methods that can be applied in different contexts, and give results that can be validly compared.

Future health applications of genomics: priorities for communication, behavioral, and social sciences research.

PubMed

McBride, Colleen M; Bowen, Deborah; Brody, Lawrence C; Condit, Celeste M; Croyle, Robert T; Gwinn, Marta; Khoury, Muin J; Koehly, Laura M; Korf, Bruce R; Marteau, Theresa M; McLeroy, Kenneth; Patrick, Kevin; Valente, Thomas W

2010-05-01

Despite the quickening momentum of genomic discovery, the communication, behavioral, and social sciences research needed for translating this discovery into public health applications has lagged behind. The National Human Genome Research Institute held a 2-day workshop in October 2008 convening an interdisciplinary group of scientists to recommend forward-looking priorities for translational research. This research agenda would be designed to redress the top three risk factors (tobacco use, poor diet, and physical inactivity) that contribute to the four major chronic diseases (heart disease, type 2 diabetes, lung disease, and many cancers) and account for half of all deaths worldwide. Three priority research areas were identified: (1) improving the public's genetic literacy in order to enhance consumer skills; (2) gauging whether genomic information improves risk communication and adoption of healthier behaviors more than current approaches; and (3) exploring whether genomic discovery in concert with emerging technologies can elucidate new behavioral intervention targets. Important crosscutting themes also were identified, including the need to: (1) anticipate directions of genomic discovery; (2) take an agnostic scientific perspective in framing research questions asking whether genomic discovery adds value to other health promotion efforts; and (3) consider multiple levels of influence and systems that contribute to important public health problems. The priorities and themes offer a framework for a variety of stakeholders, including those who develop priorities for research funding, interdisciplinary teams engaged in genomics research, and policymakers grappling with how to use the products born of genomics research to address public health challenges. 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Prison health service directors' views on research priorities and organizational issues in conducting research in prison: outcomes of a national deliberative roundtable.

PubMed

Simpson, Paul Leslie; Guthrie, Jill; Butler, Tony

2017-06-12

Purpose Given that prisoners have significant health needs across most areas, the paucity of prisoner health research, and the difficulties involved in the conduct of research in this setting, there is a need to develop research priorities that align with key stakeholder groups. One such group are those responsible for health service provision in prisons - prison health service directors. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach Prison health service directors in each Australian state and territory were invited to participate in a national (deliberative) roundtable where the consensus building nominal group technique was utilized. This involved the identification of research priorities and organizational issues in conducting research with prisoners, and ranking research priorities. A thematic analysis was conducted on organizational issues. Findings In total, 13 participants attended the roundtable. Participants identified 28 research priorities and 12 organizational issues. Top ranked research priorities were mental health, cognitive and intellectual disability, post-release health maintenance, ageing prisoners, chronic health conditions and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health. Themes identified from the organizational issues included prisoner access to research participation, health and research literacy of custodial staff, and institutional protectionism in response to research that may discover negative information about the custodial setting. Research limitations/implications These findings should inform future efforts to improve research infrastructures to undertake research to improve the health of people in Australian prisons, and help to align researchers' efforts with those of a key organizational stakeholder. Originality/value This is the first paper to determine the research priorities and organizational issues in conducting research in prisons of prison health service directors.

National occupational health research priorities, agenda and strategy of Japan: invited report in NORA symposium 2001, USA.

PubMed

Araki, Shunichi; Tachi, Masatomo

2003-01-01

An invited report on national occupational health research priorities, agenda and strategy of Japan was delivered in the NORA (National Occupational Research Agenda) Symposium 2001, USA. The third NORA Symposium was held by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in Washington DC on June 27, 2001. The national conference in Japan entitled "Conference on Occupational Health Research Strategies in the 21st Century" was organized by the Japanese Ministry of Labour (Currently, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare) in the years 1998-2001, and the national occupational health research agenda and strategy for the next decade in Japan was identified. A total of 50 Conference members, i.e., representatives from various fields of occupational health in Japan, ranked 58 comprehensive research topics, yielding short-term (5-year) and long-term (6-10 year) priority research topics. Overall (10-year) priority research topics were calculated by combining the short-term and long-term priority scores. Together with the ranking by 145 extramural occupational health specialists, it was identified that work stress (i.e., one of the 58 research topics) was the first overall priority research topic for the next 10 years in Japan. Three other topics, i.e., elderly workers, women workers and maternity protection, and mental health and quality of work and life, were the second group of priority topics; and hazard and risk assessment and biological effect index were the third priority group. Based on the scores for the short-term and long-term priority research topics, all 58 research topics were classified into three key research areas with 18 key research issues (National Occupational Health Research Agenda, NOHRA). Finally, eight implementation measures of national strategy for the Japanese Government to promote occupational health research were introduced.

Identification of current priorities for research in humanitarian action: proceedings of the First Annual UN OCHA Policy and Research Conference.

PubMed

Foran, Mark P; Greenough, Paul G; Thow, Andrew; Gilman, Daniel; Schütz, Andreas; Chandran, Rahul; Baiocchi, Allegra

2012-06-01

On December 12-13, 2011, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) hosted a humanitarian policy and research conference on the theme of "Risk, Adaptation and Innovation in Humanitarian Action." The four sessions of the conference covered humanitarian action in a changing world, adaptation and innovation in humanitarian action, humanitarian action in protracted and violent conflict, and effective humanitarian action. This special report contains summaries of presentations in each session and the conclusions resulting from the discussions throughout. Through a process of open discussion, debate, and a closing survey, the conference participants identified four top priorities in humanitarian research for the coming years: evidence-driven humanitarian decision-making; accountability and transparency; risk and agility; and partnership. In addition to plans for a 2nd Annual Research and Policy conference in December of 2012, specific outcomes of the conference include a series of regional workshops in 2012 and 2013, launching with Asia, Africa and the Middle East; creation of Policy Working Groups (PWG) for each research priority identified; and a new flagship OCHA publication, to be launched in late 2012 or early 2013, which will share the progress made on the research priorities identified.

HIV and Alcohol Research Priorities of City, State, and Federal Policymakers: Results of a Delphi Study

PubMed Central

Li, Lingfeng; Braithwaite, Ronald Scott

2015-01-01

We identified the research areas related to HIV and alcohol consumption that were of highest priority to city, state, and federal policymakers. From June to July 2014, we conducted a 3-round Delphi study to elicit from experts a list of alcohol- and HIV-related clinical trial research questions that were important to fund and rank order the list to identify questions of highest priority. Translating evidence into practice must be improved because some questions that have been extensively studied with results published in peer-reviewed journals were identified by the panel as areas needing additional research. PMID:26180968

HIV and Alcohol Research Priorities of City, State, and Federal Policymakers: Results of a Delphi Study.

PubMed

Uyei, Jennifer; Li, Lingfeng; Braithwaite, Ronald Scott

2015-09-01

We identified the research areas related to HIV and alcohol consumption that were of highest priority to city, state, and federal policymakers. From June to July 2014, we conducted a 3-round Delphi study to elicit from experts a list of alcohol- and HIV-related clinical trial research questions that were important to fund and rank order the list to identify questions of highest priority. Translating evidence into practice must be improved because some questions that have been extensively studied with results published in peer-reviewed journals were identified by the panel as areas needing additional research.

Research priorities in Italian diabetes nursing care: findings from a Delphi study.

PubMed

Palese, A; Gentilini, S; Lo Grasso, G; Branca, M T; Chiandetti, R; Mansutti, I

2015-01-01

Defining a set of research priorities for diabetes nursing care in the Italian context. A two-step study design based on a modified Delphi technique was undertaken in 2013. In the first stage of research, five systematic reviews of literature were performed. Among them 865 recommendations in diabetes nursing care emerged, and 217 (25.1%) were categorized at level IV or lower, thus based on a lack of knowledge and therefore a potential research area. Homogeneous recommendations among the 217 emerged and were categorized by two researchers independently: 96 final recommendations were identified and transformed into items embodied into a questionnaire. A Likert scale ranging from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high) was used to collect the consensus regarding priority. For that purpose a sample of 200 nurses was randomly considered. Potential participants were invited to cooperate via email through a letter reporting aims and methods. In the first round 85 nurses participated; in the third and final round, only 13 nurses took part. Participants have identified 14 research priorities categorized into three main areas: 1) education strategies' effectiveness (n=7); 2) models of care delivery and advanced nursing education effectiveness (n=4); and 3) in specific clinical issues (n=3). More research on patient education and on models of care delivery and advanced nursing education should be included in any future Italian agenda.

Research priorities and history of advanced composite compression testing

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baumann, K. J.

1981-01-01

Priorities for standard compression testing research in advanced laminated fibrous composite materials are presented along with a state of the art survey (completed in 1979) including history and commentary on industrial test methods. Historically apparent research priorities and consequent (lack of) progress are supporting evidence for newly derived priorities.

HIV prevention among diverse young MSM: Research needs, priorities, and opportunities

PubMed Central

Rhodes, Scott D.; Wong, Frank Y.

2016-01-01

There remains a profound need for innovative and effective interventions designed for young men who have sex with men (YMSM) generally; and racial and ethnic minority YMSM, YMSM living in rural communities, and low-income YMSM, particularly, to prevent HIV and improve health outcomes in the United States. This introduction to this theme issue identifies some of the research needs, priorities, and opportunities that emerged during a seminal NIMHD-sponsored workshop on HIV prevention behavioral interventions for diverse YMSM. It provides researchers, practitioners, and federal partners guidance in next steps to reduce the impact of the HIV epidemic among YMSMS. The needs, priorities, and opportunities identified serve as a foundation to push both the science and the practice of HIV prevention forward. We recognize that considerably more research is needed, and this issue highlights intervention research – where we have been and where we should go. With the disparities faced by YMSM, we must act rapidly to do the work it will take to meet their prevention needs, reduce infections, and save lives. PMID:27244188

Final priority; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Projects and Centers Program--Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers. Final priority.

PubMed

2013-06-19

The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) on Technologies to Support Successful Aging with Disability under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for a competition in fiscal year (FY) 2013 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on areas of national need. We intend to use this priority to improve outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

Publishing priorities of biomedical research funders

PubMed Central

Collins, Ellen

2013-01-01

Objectives To understand the publishing priorities, especially in relation to open access, of 10 UK biomedical research funders. Design Semistructured interviews. Setting 10 UK biomedical research funders. Participants 12 employees with responsibility for research management at 10 UK biomedical research funders; a purposive sample to represent a range of backgrounds and organisation types. Conclusions Publicly funded and large biomedical research funders are committed to open access publishing and are pleased with recent developments which have stimulated growth in this area. Smaller charitable funders are supportive of the aims of open access, but are concerned about the practical implications for their budgets and their funded researchers. Across the board, biomedical research funders are turning their attention to other priorities for sharing research outputs, including data, protocols and negative results. Further work is required to understand how smaller funders, including charitable funders, can support open access. PMID:24154520

Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Stakeholder Engagement Project identified systematic review priority areas.

PubMed

Scott, Anna Mae; Clark, Justin; Dooley, Liz; Jones, Ann; Jones, Mark; Del Mar, Chris

2018-05-22

Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Group conducts systematic reviews of the evidence for treatment and prevention of ARIs. We report the results of a prioritisation project, aiming to identify highest priority systematic review topics. The project consisted of 2 Phases. Phase 1 analysed the gap between existing RCTs and Cochrane Systematic Reviews (reported previously). Phase 2 (reported here) consisted of a two-round survey. In round 1, respondents prioritised 68 topics and suggested up to 10 additional topics; in Round 2, respondents prioritised top 25 topics from Round 1. Respondents included clinicians, researchers, systematic reviewers, allied health, patients, and carers, from 33 different countries. In Round 1, 154 respondents identified 20 priority topics, most commonly selecting topics in non-specific ARIs, influenza, and common cold. 50 respondents also collectively suggested 134 additional topics. In Round 2, 78 respondents prioritised top 25 topics, most commonly in the areas of non-specific ARIs, pneumonia and influenza. We generated a list of priority systematic review topics, to guide the Cochrane ARI Group's systematic review work for the next 24 months. Stakeholder involvement enhanced the transparency of the process, and will increase the usability and relevance of the Group's work to stakeholders. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Setting priorities for space research: Opportunities and imperatives

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1992-01-01

Discussed here is the first phase of a study by a task group convened by the Space Studies Board to ascertain whether it should attempt to develop a methodology for recommending priorities among the various initiatives in space research (that is, scientific activities concerned with phenomena in space or utilizing observations from space). It is argued that such priority statements by the space research community are both necessary and desirable and would contribute to the formulation and implementation of public policy. The establishment of priorities to enhance effective management of the nation's scientific research program in space is advocated. It is argued that scientific objectives and purposes should determine how and under what circumstances research should be done.

Isocyanates and human health: Multi-stakeholder information needs and research priorities

PubMed Central

Lockey, JE; Redlich, CA; Streicher, R; Pfahles-Hutchens, A; Hakkinen, PJ; Ellison, GL; Harber, P; Utell, M; Holland, J; Comai, A; White, Marc

2014-01-01

Objective Outline the knowledge gaps and research priorities identified by a broad-base of stakeholders involved in the planning and participation of an international conference and research agenda workshop on isocyanates and human health held in Potomac, Maryland in April 2013. Methods A multi-modal iterative approach was employed for data collection including pre-conference surveys, review of a 2001 consensus conference on isocyanates, oral and poster presentations, focused break-out sessions, panel discussions and post-conference research agenda workshop. Results Participants included representatives of consumer and worker health, health professionals, regulatory agencies, academic and industry scientists, labor, and trade associations. Conclusions Recommendations were summarized regarding knowledge gaps and research priorities in the following areas: worker and consumer exposures; toxicology, animal models, and biomarkers; human cancer risk; environmental exposure and monitoring; and respiratory epidemiology and disease, and occupational health surveillance. PMID:25563538

Public priorities for osteoporosis and fracture research: results from a general population survey.

PubMed

Paskins, Zoe; Jinks, Clare; Mahmood, Waheed; Jayakumar, Prakash; Sangan, Caroline B; Belcher, John; Gwilym, Stephen

2017-12-01

This is the first national study of public and patient research priorities in osteoporosis and fracture. We have identified new research areas of importance to members of the public, particularly 'access to information from health professionals'. The findings are being incorporated into the research strategy of the National Osteoporosis Society. This study aimed to prioritise, with patients and public members, research topics for the osteoporosis research agenda. An e-survey to identify topics for research was co-designed with patient representatives. A link to the e-survey was disseminated to supporters of the UK National Osteoporosis Society (NOS) in a monthly e-newsletter. Responders were asked to indicate their top priority for research across four topics (understanding and preventing osteoporosis, living with osteoporosis, treating osteoporosis and treating fractures) and their top three items within each topic. Descriptive statistics were used to describe demographics and item ranking. A latent class analysis was applied to identify a substantive number of clusters with different combinations of binary responses. One thousand one hundred eighty-eight (7.4%) respondents completed the e-survey. The top three items overall were 'Having easy access to advice and information from health professionals' (63.8%), 'Understanding further the safety and benefit of osteoporosis drug treatments' (49.9%) and 'Identifying the condition early by screening' (49.2%). Latent class analysis revealed distinct clusters of responses within each topic including primary care management and self-management. Those without a history of prior fracture or aged under 70 were more likely to rate items within the cluster of self-management as important (21.0 vs 12.9 and 19.8 vs 13.3%, respectively). This is the first study of public research priorities in osteoporosis and has identified new research areas of importance to members of the public including access to information. The findings

Consulting patients in setting priorities in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (M.E.) research: findings from a national on-line survey.

PubMed

Childs, Nicola; Robinson, Lisa; Chowdhury, Sonya; Ogden, Clare; Newton, Julia L

2015-01-01

Myalgic encephalitis (M.E.) is a common condition, the cause of which is not known and there are no treatments available. In this study the national patient support group Action for M.E. sought the opinions of their members via an online survey as to what they felt should be future priorities for M.E. Respondents were asked what they considered first, second and third research priorities to be from a list of 13 pre-defined options. Individuals were invited to provide additional free text comments about Action for M.E.'s research priorities in general. Of the 1144 respondents: 822 had M.E.; 94 were a supporting a member of Action for M.E. ; 66 were carers for someone with M.E.; 26 were professionals with an interest in M.E.; 136 had a family member or colleague with M.E. Individuals selected more than one category as applicable. The top five research priorities identified were: disease processes to achieve a better understanding of the causes of M.E.; more effective treatments; faster and more accurate diagnosis; clinical course of M.E.; outcomes and natural history; and severely affected patients. Least popular priorities were: sleep; economic research towards identifying the cost of ME; and psychological aspects. Much of the free text comments emphasised the importance of funding biomedical research into disease processes to achieve a better understanding of the causes of M.E. Three themes were identified in relation to this topic: accurate diagnosis and awareness; risk factors and causes; drug development and curative therapies. In conclusion; individuals affected by M.E. have clear views regarding priorities for research investment. These have informed Action for M.E.'s ongoing research strategy and ultimately will inform national and international research priorities.

Transit signal priority research tools

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2008-05-01

This report presents the results of a research project that addresses Transit Signal Priority (TSP) deployment issues. The report reviews National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol (NTCIP) 1211 Signal Control and Prioritization (SCP) sta...

78 FR 13600 - Proposed Priority-National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Traumatic Brain...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-28

... designs. The research must focus on outcomes in one or more of the following domains identified in NIDRR's... Rehabilitation Research--Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Centers Collaborative Research Project [CFDA Number... Services proposes a priority under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program...

Setting priorities for space research: An experiment in methodology

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

In 1989, the Space Studies Board created the Task Group on Priorities in Space Research to determine whether scientists should take a role in recommending priorities for long-term space research initiatives and, if so, to analyze the priority-setting problem in this context and develop a method by which such priorities could be established. After answering the first question in the affirmative in a previous report, the task group set out to accomplish the second task. The basic assumption in developing a priority-setting process is that a reasoned and structured approach for ordering competing initiatives will yield better results than other ways of proceeding. The task group proceeded from the principle that the central criterion for evaluating a research initiative must be its scientific merit -- the value of the initiative to the proposing discipline and to science generally. The group developed a two-stage methodology for priority setting and constructed a procedure and format to support the methodology. The first of two instruments developed was a standard format for structuring proposals for space research initiatives. The second instrument was a formal, semiquantitative appraisal procedure for evaluating competing proposals. This report makes available complete templates for the methodology, including the advocacy statement and evaluation forms, as well as an 11-step schema for a priority-setting process. From the beginning of its work, the task group was mindful that the issue of priority setting increasingly pervades all of federally supported science and that its work would have implications extending beyond space research. Thus, although the present report makes no recommendations for action by NASA or other government agencies, it provides the results of the task group's work for the use of others who may study priority-setting procedures or take up the challenge of implementing them in the future.

Center for Research Strategy Priority Initiatives

Cancer.gov

CRS leads priority initiatives to support cancer research to advance scientific knowledge and help people live longer, healthier lives. Learn more about the Resources for Cancer Researchers portal, Team Science, and Idea Generation with NCI staff.

HIV Prevention Among Diverse Young MSM: Research Needs, Priorities, and Opportunities.

PubMed

Rhodes, Scott D; Wong, Frank Y

2016-06-01

There remains a profound need for innovative and effective interventions designed for young men who have sex with men (YMSM) generally, and racial and ethnic minority YMSM, YMSM living in rural communities, and low-income YMSM, particularly, to prevent HIV and improve health outcomes in the United States. This introduction to this theme issue, "Behavioral HIV Prevention Interventions for Diverse YMSM," of AIDS Education and Prevention identifies some of the research needs, priorities, and opportunities that emerged during a seminal NIMHD-sponsored workshop on HIV prevention behavioral interventions for diverse YMSM. It provides researchers, practitioners, and federal partners guidance in next steps to reduce the impact of the HIV epidemic among YMSM. The needs, priorities, and opportunities identified serve as a foundation to push both the science and the practice of HIV prevention forward. We recognize that considerably more research is needed, and this issue highlights intervention research-where we have been and where we should go. With the disparities faced by YMSM, we must act rapidly to do the work it will take to meet their prevention needs, reduce infections, and save lives.

Establishing Priorities for Oncology Nursing Research: Nurse and Patient Collaboration.

PubMed

Cox, Anna; Arber, Anne; Gallagher, Ann; MacKenzie, Mairead; Ream, Emma

2017-03-01

To obtain consensus on priorities for oncology nursing research in the United Kingdom.
. A three-round online Delphi survey.
. Oncology nurses were invited via the United Kingdom Oncology Nursing Society (UKONS) database. Patient participation was invited through patient organizations.
. 50 oncology nurses and 18 patients.
. Eligible and consenting individuals reported five priorities for oncology nursing research (round 1), rated their level of agreement with them (round 2), and restated and revised their responses in light of the group's responses (round 3). Consensus was defined as 80% agreement.
. Research priorities for oncology nursing as reported by oncology nurses and patients. 
. Consensus was reached on 50 of 107 research priorities. These priorities reflected the entire cancer pathway, from diagnosis to palliative care. Highest agreement was reached within and across groups on the need for research relating to prevention, screening, early diagnosis, and psychological care across the cancer trajectory. Little consensus was reached regarding symptoms and side effects. Some evident divergence existed. Oncology nurses and patients do not necessarily prioritize the same research areas. Prevention, screening, and early diagnosis are of the highest priority for future research among oncology nurses and patients. 
. Patients usually play little part in priority setting for research. This study provided the opportunity for meaningful patient and nurse involvement in setting a research agenda for oncology nursing that is relevant and beneficial to oncology nurses and patients.

The development of a national nutrition and mental health research agenda with comparison of priorities among diverse stakeholders.

PubMed

Davison, Karen M; D'Andreamatteo, Carla; Mitchell, Scott; Vanderkooy, Pat

2017-03-01

To develop a national nutrition and mental health research agenda based on the engagement of diverse stakeholders and to assess research priorities by stakeholder groups. A staged, integrated and participatory initiative was implemented to structure a national nutrition and mental health research agenda that included: (i) national stakeholder consultations to prioritize research questions; (ii) a workshop involving national representatives from research, policy and practice to further define priorities; (iii) triangulation of data to formulate the agenda; and (iv) test hypotheses about stakeholder influences on decision making. Canada. Diverse stakeholders including researchers, academics, administrators, service providers, policy makers, practitioners, non-profit, industry and funding agency representatives, front-line workers, individuals with lived experience of a mental health condition and those who provide care for them. This first-of-its-kind research priority-setting initiative showed points of agreement among diverse stakeholders (n 899) on research priorities aimed at service provision; however, respondents with lived experience of a mental health condition (themselves or a family member) placed emphasis on prevention and mental health promotion-based research. The final integrated agenda identified four research priorities, including programmes and services, service provider roles, the determinants of health and knowledge translation and exchange. These research priorities aim to identify effective models of care, enhance collaboration, inform policy makers and foster knowledge dissemination. Since a predictor of research uptake is the involvement of relevant stakeholders, a sustained and deliberate effort must continue to engage collaboration that will lead to the optimization of nutrition and mental health-related outcomes.

Identifying priority policy issues and health system research questions associated with recovery outcomes for burns survivors in India: a qualitative inquiry

PubMed Central

Chamania, Shobha; Potokar, Tom; Ivers, Rebecca

2018-01-01

Objectives This study aimed to identify priority policy issues and health system research questions associated with recovery outcomes for burns survivors in India. Design Qualitative inquiry; data were collected through semistructured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Setting Nine sites in urban and rural settings across India, through primary, secondary and tertiary health facilities. Participants Healthcare providers, key informants, burns survivors and/or their carers. Results Participants acknowledged the challenges of burns care and recovery, and identified the need for prolonged rehabilitation. Challenges identified included poor communication between healthcare providers and survivors, limited rehabilitation services, difficulties with transportation to health facility and high cost associated with burns care. Burns survivors and healthcare providers identified the stigma attached with burns as the biggest challenge within the healthcare system, as well as in the community. Systems barriers (eg, limited infrastructure and human resources), lack of economic and social support, and poor understanding of recovery and rehabilitation were identified as major barriers to recovery. Conclusions Though further research is needed for addressing gaps in data, strengthening of health systems can enable providers to address issues such as developing/providing, protocols, capacity building, effective coordination between key organisations and referral networks. PMID:29523568

Involving healthcare professionals and family carers in setting research priorities for end-of-life care.

PubMed

Diffin, Janet; Spence, Michael; Spencer, Rebecca; Mellor, Peter; Grande, Gunn

2017-02-02

It is important to ensure regional variances are considered when setting future end-of-life research priorities, given the differing demographics and service provision. This project sought to identify end-of-life research priorities within Greater Manchester (United Kingdom). Following an initial scoping exercise, six topics within the 10 national priorities outlined by The Palliative and end-of-life care Priority Setting Partnership were selected for exploration. A workshop involving 32 healthcare professionals and a consultation process with 26 family carers was conducted. Healthcare professionals and carers selected and discussed the topics important to them. The topics selected most frequently by both healthcare professionals and carers were 'Access to 24 hour care', 'Planning end-of-life care in advance' and 'Staff and carer education'. Healthcare professionals also developed research questions for their topics of choice which were refined to incorporate carers' views. These questions are an important starting point for future end-of-life research within Greater Manchester.

Education Research Priorities: A Collective View.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

International Development Research Centre, Ottawa (Ontario).

Emphasis of this report on education research in developing countries and priorities for future research is on providing better education to more people (many of whom live in rural areas) in spite of severe resource constraints. The need to involve policymakers in the research process and align research more closely with real needs is discussed.…

Research Priorities for Eight Areas of Adolescent Health in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

PubMed

Nagata, Jason M; Ferguson, B Jane; Ross, David A

2016-07-01

To conduct an expert-led process for identifying research priorities for eight areas of adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries. Specific adolescent health areas included communicable diseases prevention and management, injuries and violence, mental health, noncommunicable diseases management, nutrition, physical activity, substance use, and health policy. We used a modified version of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology for reaching consensus on research priorities. In a three phase process, we (1) identified research and program experts with wide-ranging backgrounds and experiences from all geographic regions through systematic searches and key informants; (2) invited these experts to propose research questions related to descriptive epidemiology, interventions (discovery, development/testing, and delivery/implementation), and health policy/systems; and (3) asked the experts to prioritize the research questions based on five criteria: clarity, answerability, importance or impact, implementation, and equity. A total of 142 experts submitted 512 questions which were edited and reduced to 303 for scoring. Overall, the types of the top 10 research questions in each of the eight health areas included descriptive epidemiology (26%), interventions: discovery (11%), development/testing (25%), delivery (33%), and policy, health and social systems (5%). Across health areas, the top questions highlighted integration of health services, vulnerable populations, and different health platforms (such as primary care, schools, families/parents, and interactive media). Priority questions have been identified for research in eight key areas of adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries. These expert-generated questions may be used by donors, program managers, and researchers to prioritize and stimulate research in adolescent health. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Research Priorities for Business Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Schultheis, Robert A.

1971-01-01

Most pressing problems representing research priorities for the business education profession do not fit into such narrow functional categories as typewriting and shorthand. Rather the problems critical to survival of our discipline in the decade ahead are more of an interdisciplinary nature. (Author)

Setting global research priorities for developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities and autism

PubMed Central

Tomlinson, Mark; Yasamy, M. Taghi; Emerson, Eric; Officer, Alana; Richler, Diane; Saxena, Shekhar

2015-01-01

Objectives The prevalence of intellectual disabilities (ID) has been estimated at 10.4/1000 worldwide with higher rates among children and adolescents in lower income countries. The objective of this paper is to address research priorities for development disabilities, notably intellectual disabilities and autism, at the global level and to propose the more rational use of scarce funds in addressing this under-investigated area. Methods An expert group was identified and invited to systematically list and score research questions. They applied the priority setting methodology of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to generate research questions and to evaluate them using a set of five criteria: answerability, feasibility, applicability and impact, support within the context and equity. Findings The results of this process clearly indicated that the important priorities for future research related to the need for effective and efficient approaches to early intervention, empowerment of families supporting a person with developmental disability and to address preventable causes of poor health in people with ID and autism. Conclusions For the public health and other systems to become more effective in delivering appropriate support to persons with developmental disabilities, greater (and more targeted) investment in research is required to produce evidence of what works consistent with international human rights standards. PMID:24397279

Delphi Study to Determine Rehabilitation Research Priorities for Older Adults With Cancer.

PubMed

Lyons, Kathleen Doyle; Radomski, Mary Vining; Alfano, Catherine M; Finkelstein, Marsha; Sleight, Alix G; Marshall, Timothy F; McKenna, Raymond; Fu, Jack B

2017-05-01

To solicit expert opinions and develop consensus around the research that is needed to improve cancer rehabilitation for older adults. Delphi methods provided a structured process to elicit and prioritize research questions from national experts. National, Web-based survey. Members (N=32) of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine completed at least 1 of 3 investigator-developed surveys. Not applicable. In the first survey, participants identified up to 5 research questions that needed to be answered to improve cancer rehabilitation for older adults. In 2 subsequent surveys, participants viewed the compilation of questions, rated the importance of each question, and identified the 5 most important questions. This generated priority scores for each question. Consensus scores were created to describe the degree of agreement around the priority of each question. Highest priority research concerns the epidemiology and measurement of function and disability in older adult cancer survivors; the effects of cancer rehabilitation interventions on falls, disability, participation, survival, costs, quality of care, and health care utilization; and testing models of care that facilitate referrals from oncology to rehabilitation providers as part of coordinated, multicomponent care. A multipronged approach is needed to fill these gaps, including targeted funding opportunities developed with an advisory panel of cancer rehabilitation experts, development of a research network to facilitate novel collaborations and grant proposals, and coordinated efforts of clinical groups to advocate for funding, practice change, and policy change. Copyright © 2016 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Setting research priorities to reduce global mortality from preterm birth and low birth weight by 2015.

PubMed

Bahl, Rajiv; Martines, Jose; Bhandari, Nita; Biloglav, Zrinka; Edmond, Karen; Iyengar, Sharad; Kramer, Michael; Lawn, Joy E; Manandhar, D S; Mori, Rintaro; Rasmussen, Kathleen M; Sachdev, H P S; Singhal, Nalini; Tomlinson, Mark; Victora, Cesar; Williams, Anthony F; Chan, Kit Yee; Rudan, Igor

2012-06-01

This paper aims to identify health research priorities that could improve the rate of progress in reducing global neonatal mortality from preterm birth and low birth weight (PB/LBW), as set out in the UN's Millennium Development Goal 4. We applied the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology for setting priorities in health research investments. In the process coordinated by the World Health Organization in 2007-2008, 21 researchers with interest in child, maternal and newborn health suggested 82 research ideas that spanned across the broad spectrum of epidemiological research, health policy and systems research, improvement of existing interventions and development of new interventions. The 82 research questions were then assessed for answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, maximum potential for mortality reduction and the effect on equity using the CHNRI method. The top 10 identified research priorities were dominated by health systems and policy research questions (eg, identification of LBW infants born at home within 24-48 hours of birth for additional care; approaches to improve quality of care of LBW infants in health facilities; identification of barriers to optimal home care practices including care seeking; and approaches to increase the use of antenatal corticosteriods in preterm labor and to improve access to hospital care for LBW infants). These were followed by priorities for improvement of the existing interventions (eg, early initiation of breastfeeding, including feeding mode and techniques for those unable to suckle directly from the breast; improved cord care, such as chlorhexidine application; and alternative methods to Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC) to keep LBW infants warm in community settings). The highest-ranked epidemiological question suggested improving criteria for identifying LBW infants who need to be cared for in a hospital. Among the new interventions, the greatest support was shown for the development of

Establishing research priorities relating to the long-term impact of TIA and minor stroke through stakeholder-centred consensus.

PubMed

Turner, Grace M; Backman, Ruth; McMullan, Christel; Mathers, Jonathan; Marshall, Tom; Calvert, Melanie

2018-01-01

What is the problem and why is this important? Mini-strokes are similar to full strokes, but symptoms last less than 24 h. Many people (up to 70%) have long-term problems after a mini-stroke, such as anxiety; depression; problems with brain functioning (like memory loss); and fatigue (feeling tired). However, the current healthcare pathway only focuses on preventing another stroke and care for other long-term problems is not routinely given. Without proper treatment, people with long-term problems after a mini-stroke could have worse quality of life and may find it difficult to return to work and their social activities. What is the aim of the research? We wanted to understand the research priorities of patients, health care professionals and key stakeholders relating to the long-term impact of mini-stroke. How did we address the problem? We invited patients, clinicians, researchers and other stakeholders to attend a meeting. At the meeting people discussed the issues relating to the long-term impact of mini-stroke and came to an agreement on their research priorities. There were three stages: (1) people wrote down their individual research suggestions; (2) in smaller groups people came to an agreement on what their top research questions were; and (3) the whole group agreed final research priorities. What did we find? Eleven people attended who were representatives for patients, GPs, stroke consultants, stroke nurses, psychologists, the Stroke Association (charity) and stroke researchers, The group agreed on eleven research questions which they felt were the most important to improve health and well-being for people who have had a mini-stroke.The eleven research questions encompass a range of categories, including: understanding the existing care patients receive (according to diagnosis and geographical location); exploring what optimal care post-TIA/minor stroke should comprise (identifying and treating impairments, information giving and support groups) and how

Using the Nine Common Themes of Good Practice checklist as a tool for evaluating the research priority setting process of a provincial research and program evaluation program.

PubMed

Mador, Rebecca L; Kornas, Kathy; Simard, Anne; Haroun, Vinita

2016-03-23

Given the context-specific nature of health research prioritization and the obligation to effectively allocate resources to initiatives that will achieve the greatest impact, evaluation of priority setting processes can refine and strengthen such exercises and their outcomes. However, guidance is needed on evaluation tools that can be applied to research priority setting. This paper describes the adaption and application of a conceptual framework to evaluate a research priority setting exercise operating within the public health sector in Ontario, Canada. The Nine Common Themes of Good Practice checklist, described by Viergever et al. (Health Res Policy Syst 8:36, 2010) was used as the conceptual framework to evaluate the research priority setting process developed for the Locally Driven Collaborative Projects (LDCP) program in Ontario, Canada. Multiple data sources were used to inform the evaluation, including a review of selected priority setting approaches, surveys with priority setting participants, document review, and consultation with the program advisory committee. The evaluation assisted in identifying improvements to six elements of the LDCP priority setting process. The modifications were aimed at improving inclusiveness, information gathering practices, planning for project implementation, and evaluation. In addition, the findings identified that the timing of priority setting activities and level of control over the process were key factors that influenced the ability to effectively implement changes. The findings demonstrate the novel adaptation and application of the 'Nine Common Themes of Good Practice checklist' as a tool for evaluating a research priority setting exercise. The tool can guide the development of evaluation questions and enables the assessment of key constructs related to the design and delivery of a research priority setting process.

Establishing and agreeing on research priorities

Treesearch

Ian de Ia Roche

1999-01-01

The organizers asked me to share with you my experiences in developing and implementing a process for establishing and agreeing on research priorities in a multi-stakeholder research institute such as Forintek. The mechanism we have in place has been well received by Forintek's membership and certain aspects have been adopted by other research organizations. While...

Using Photovoice, Latina Transgender Women Identify Priorities in a New Immigrant-Destination State

PubMed Central

Rhodes, Scott D.; Alonzo, Jorge; Mann, Lilli; Simán, Florence; Garcia, Manuel; Abraham, Claire; Sun, Christina J.

2016-01-01

Little is known about the immigrant Latino/a transgender community in the southeastern United States. This study used photovoice, a methodology aligned with community-based participatory research, to explore needs, assets, and priorities of Latina transgender women in North Carolina. Nine immigrant Latina male-to-female transgender women documented their daily experiences through photography, engaged in empowerment-based photo-discussions, and organized a bilingual community forum to move knowledge to action. From the participants’ photographs and words, 11 themes emerged in three domains: daily challenges (e.g., health risks, uncertainty about the future, discrimination, and anxiety about family reactions); needs and priorities (e.g., health and social services, emotional support, and collective action); and community strengths and assets (e.g., supportive individuals and institutions, wisdom through lived experiences, and personal and professional goals). At the community forum, 60 influential advocates, including Latina transgender women, representatives from community-based organizations, health and social service providers, and law enforcement, reviewed findings and identified ten recommended actions. Overall, photovoice served to obtain rich qualitative insight into the lived experiences of Latina transgender women that was then shared with local leaders and agencies to help address priorities. PMID:27110226

Research Map of Research Priorities in HE Studies in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

AlSumih, A. M.

2016-01-01

This study presents a research map for the key research priorities of higher education (HE) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study diagnoses and analyzes the research reality in HE studies in KSA in terms of strength points and improvement opportunities. It also explores the research map fields of current and prospective research priorities in…

Exploring the challenge of health research priority setting in partnership: reflections on the methodology used by the James Lind Alliance Pressure Ulcer Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Madden, Mary; Morley, Richard

2016-01-01

The James Lind Alliance (JLA) brings patients, carers and clinicians together in Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) to identify and prioritise shared uncertainties about the effects of treatment. The JLA emerged from the evidence-informed healthcare movement to address a concern that the research being carried out on treatment effectiveness is not that of most importance to patients and health professionals. In the JLA PSPs, 'hard' evidence-informed ideals meet 'soft' participatory practices. This article explores the challenges of putting co-production methods into practice by reflecting on the methods used by the JLA Pressure Ulcer PSP (JLAPUP). The JLA principles are transparency, inclusivity and avoiding waste in research. This means paying the same close critical attention to how PSPs are designed and run, as is desired in the health research which the JLA seeks to influence. JLAPUP showed that it was possible to work in partnership in a field where patients are often elderly, immobile, unrepresented and particularly unwell, many of whom are living with more than one long term condition. However, for those unfamiliar with it, 'uncertainty' was a difficult term to get to grips with. Also, it was harder for some people than others to take part and to have their voices heard and understood. In keeping with other PSPs, JLAPUP found that the nature and quality of research into pressure ulcer prevention and treatment did not reflect the priorities of those who took part. ᅟ. Studies identifying a mismatch between the priorities of academics and clinicians and those of people with direct experience of a health condition pose a challenge to the assumption that professional researchers can represent the interests of patients and the public in setting priorities for health research. The James Lind Alliance (JLA) brings patients, carers and clinicians together in Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) to identify and prioritise shared uncertainties about the effects of

Neuroprosthesis consumers' forum: consumer priorities for research directions.

PubMed

Kilgore, K L; Scherer, M; Bobblitt, R; Dettloff, J; Dombrowski, D M; Godbold, N; Jatich, J W; Morris, R; Penko, J S; Schremp, E S; Cash, L A

2001-01-01

The purpose of this forum was to discuss with consumers having spinal cord injury what their research priorities would be for the field of functional electrical stimulation (FES) and to explore the impact of technology in the lives of people with disabilities. Both FES users and nonusers were included on the panel. The format for the discussion was primarily question and answer, with each participant giving his or her personal response to the moderator's question. Consumer research priorities depended on the individual and his or her personal priorities, preferences, background, history, and level of injury. Common themes that emerged were independence, ease of movement, ease of control, and spontaneity. From the consumers' perspective, the focus of research to restore function ought to be based on the needs and desires of the consumer, not just on the scientifically intriguing aspects of a particular technology.

Differences between patients' and clinicians' research priorities from the Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Care Priority Setting Partnership.

PubMed

Boney, O; Nathanson, M H; Grocott, M P W; Metcalf, L

2017-09-01

The James Lind Alliance Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Care Priority Setting Partnership was a recent collaborative venture bringing approximately 2000 patients, carers and clinicians together to agree priorities for future research into anaesthesia and critical care. This secondary analysis compares the research priorities of 303 service users, 1068 clinicians and 325 clinicians with experience as service users. All three groups prioritised research to improve patient safety. Service users prioritised research about improving patient experience, whereas clinicians prioritised research about clinical effectiveness. Clinicians who had experience as service users consistently prioritised research more like clinicians than like service users. Individual research questions about patient experience were more popular with patients and carers than with clinicians in all but one case. We conclude that patients, carers and clinicians prioritise research questions differently. All groups prioritise research into patient safety, but service users also favour research into patient experience, whereas clinicians favour research into clinical effectiveness. © 2017 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.

Delphi Survey of Clinical Nursing and Midwifery Research Priorities in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.

PubMed

Sun, Carolyn; Dohrn, Jennifer; Oweis, Arwa; Huijer, Huda Abu-Saad; Abu-Moghli, Fathieh; Dawani, Hania; Ghazi, Cheherezade; Larson, Elaine

2017-03-01

As the shortage of nurses and midwives is expected to worsen in the Eastern Mediterranean region concomitantly with a growing focus on achievement of universal health coverage, nurses and midwives are expected to fill major gaps in health care. Hence, the need for a solid evidence base for nursing practice and a clear direction for clinical nursing research are paramount. Therefore, a Delphi survey was conducted to determine clinical (research focused on patient outcomes) nursing and midwifery priorities for research within this region. A Delphi survey, using iterative rounds of an online survey of regional clinical nursing and midwifery research experts, was conducted between January and April 2016. Consensus was determined by percentage agreement on level of priority for topics as determined by participants. Additionally, results were compared between countries within the region by income and mortality levels using Kendall's tau. Critical research topics were focused on public/community/primary care as well as emergency preparedness for disasters, and these priorities are well aligned with gaps in the literature for this region. There were statistically significant differences between priority level and country mortality group for geriatrics, self-management of disease, and sexually transmitted infections. Critical research priorities should focus on population-based health topics. Between-country differences should be analyzed further. A clinical research database for the region may help improve research access for nurses and midwives. Practicing nurses and midwives lack extensive evidence (including culturally relevant evidence) on which to practice. Increasing research in areas identified in this survey may improve patient outcomes and quality of care regionally. © 2017 Sigma Theta Tau International.

Priorities for research in child maltreatment, intimate partner violence and resilience to violence exposures: results of an international Delphi consensus development process.

PubMed

Wathen, C Nadine; MacGregor, Jennifer C D; Hammerton, Joanne; Coben, Jeffrey H; Herrman, Helen; Stewart, Donna E; MacMillan, Harriet L

2012-08-21

Intimate partner violence (IPV) and child maltreatment (CM) are major global public health problems. The Preventing Violence Across the Lifespan (PreVAiL) Research Network, an international group of over 60 researchers and national and international knowledge-user partners in CM and IPV, sought to identify evidence-based research priorities in IPV and CM, with a focus on resilience, using a modified Delphi consensus development process. Review of existing empirical evidence, PreVAiL documents and team discussion identified a starting list of 20 priorities in the following categories: resilience to violence exposure (RES), CM, and IPV, as well as priorities that cross-cut the content areas (CC), and others specific to research methodologies (RM) in violence research. PreVAiL members (N = 47) completed two online survey rounds, and one round of discussions via three teleconference calls to rate, rank and refine research priorities. Research priorities were: to examine key elements of promising or successful programmes in RES/CM/IPV to build intervention pilot work; CC: to integrate violence questions into national and international surveys, and RM: to investigate methods for collecting and collating datasets to link data and to conduct pooled, meta and sub-group analyses to identify promising interventions for particular groups. These evidence-based research priorities, developed by an international team of violence, gender and mental health researchers and knowledge-user partners, are of relevance for prevention and resilience-oriented research in the areas of IPV and CM.

Setting Priorities for NIOSH Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gallagher, Richard E.

1975-01-01

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is attempting to develop total programs of occupational safety and health protection. It has established research criteria and a priority system for evaluating the order of investigating suspect substances or agents based upon the expected gain of the health benefit. (Author/MW)

Setting global research priorities for developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities and autism.

PubMed

Tomlinson, M; Yasamy, M T; Emerson, E; Officer, A; Richler, D; Saxena, S

2014-12-01

The prevalence of intellectual disabilities (ID) has been estimated at 10.4/1000 worldwide with higher rates among children and adolescents in lower income countries. The objective of this paper is to address research priorities for development disabilities, notably ID and autism, at the global level and to propose the more rational use of scarce funds in addressing this under-investigated area. An expert group was identified and invited to systematically list and score research questions. They applied the priority setting methodology of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to generate research questions and to evaluate them using a set of five criteria: answerability, feasibility, applicability and impact, support within the context and equity. The results of this process clearly indicated that the important priorities for future research related to the need for effective and efficient approaches to early intervention, empowerment of families supporting a person with developmental disability and to address preventable causes of poor health in people with ID and autism. For the public health and other systems to become more effective in delivering appropriate support to persons with developmental disabilities, greater (and more targeted) investment in research is required to produce evidence of what works consistent with international human rights standards. © 2014 MENCAP and International Association of the Scientific Study of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Are scientific research outputs aligned with national policy makers' priorities? A case study of tuberculosis in Cambodia.

PubMed

Boudarene, Lydia; James, Richard; Coker, Richard; Khan, Mishal S

2017-10-01

With funding for tuberculosis (TB) research decreasing, and the high global disease burden persisting, there are calls for increased investment in TB research. However, justification of such investments is questionable, when translation of research outputs into policy and health care improvements remains a challenge for TB and other diseases. Using TB in Cambodia as a case study, we investigate how evidence needs of national policy makers are addressed by topics covered in research publications. We first conducted a systematic review to compile all studies on TB in Cambodia published since 2000. We then identified priority areas in which evidence for policy and programme planning are required from the perspective of key national TB control stakeholders. Finally, results from the literature review were analysed in relation to the priority research areas for national policy makers to assess overlap and highlight gaps in evidence. Priority research areas were: TB-HIV co-infection; childhood TB; multidrug resistant TB (MDR-TB); and universal and equitable access to quality diagnosis and treatment. On screening 1687 unique papers retrieved from our literature search, 253 were eligible publications focusing on TB in Cambodia. Of these, only 73 (29%) addressed one of the four priority research areas. Overall, 30 (11%), five (2%), seven (2%) and 37 (14%) studies reported findings relevant to TB-HIV, childhood TB, MDR-TB and access to quality diagnosis and treatment respectively. Our analysis shows that a small proportion of the research outputs in Cambodia address priority areas for informing policy and programme planning. This case study illustrates that there is substantial room for improvement in alignment between research outputs and evidence gaps that national policy makers would like to see addressed; better coordination between researchers, funders and policy makers' on identifying priority research topics may increase the relevance of research findings to health

Setting Priorities in Global Child Health Research Investments: Addressing Values of Stakeholders

PubMed Central

Kapiriri, Lydia; Tomlinson, Mark; Gibson, Jennifer; Chopra, Mickey; El Arifeen, Shams; Black, Robert E.; Rudan, Igor

2007-01-01

Aim To identify main groups of stakeholders in the process of health research priority setting and propose strategies for addressing their systems of values. Methods In three separate exercises that took place between March and June 2006 we interviewed three different groups of stakeholders: 1) members of the global research priority setting network; 2) a diverse group of national-level stakeholders from South Africa; and 3) participants at the conference related to international child health held in Washington, DC, USA. Each of the groups was administered different version of the questionnaire in which they were asked to set weights to criteria (and also minimum required thresholds, where applicable) that were a priori defined as relevant to health research priority setting by the consultants of the Child Health and Nutrition Research initiative (CHNRI). Results At the global level, the wide and diverse group of respondents placed the greatest importance (weight) to the criterion of maximum potential for disease burden reduction, while the most stringent threshold was placed on the criterion of answerability in an ethical way. Among the stakeholders’ representatives attending the international conference, the criterion of deliverability, answerability, and sustainability of health research results was proposed as the most important one. At the national level in South Africa, the greatest weight was placed on the criterion addressing the predicted impact on equity of the proposed health research. Conclusions Involving a large group of stakeholders when setting priorities in health research investments is important because the criteria of relevance to scientists and technical experts, whose knowledge and technical expertise is usually central to the process, may not be appropriate to specific contexts and in accordance with the views and values of those who invest in health research, those who benefit from it, or wider society as a whole. PMID:17948948

High Priority Future Research Needs for Obstructive Sleep Apnea Diagnosis and Treatment

PubMed Central

Patel, Kamal; Moorthy, Denish; Chan, Jeffrey A.; Concannon, Thomas W.; Ratichek, Sara J.; Chung, Mei; Balk, Ethan M.

2013-01-01

Study Objectives: To identify and prioritize future research needs (FRN) topics for diagnosis and treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Methods: Twenty-one panel members represented six stake-holder categories: patients and the public, providers; purchasers of health care, payers, policymakers, and principal investigators. Building on a recently completed comparative effectiveness review, stakeholders nominated and discussed potential FRN topics. Stakeholders then nominated their top priority FRN topics based on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Effective Health Care Program Selection Criteria. From these nominations, the highest priority FRN topics were determined and were elaborated upon to include possible study designs to address the topics. Results: Thirty-seven topics were discussed and prioritized. The nine highest priority FRN topics included: cost-effectiveness of management strategies, defining age- and sex-specific criteria for OSA, evaluating routine preoperative screening for OSA, evaluating involvement of a sleep medicine specialist in diagnosis of OSA, evaluating clinical prediction rules, assessing the effect of treating sleep disordered breathing and long-term clinical outcomes, comparing treatments for patients who do not tolerate positive airway pressure, evaluating strategies to improve treatment compliance, and evaluating the association between sleep apnea severity and long-term clinical outcomes. Conclusions: While there are numerous specific research questions with low or insufficient strength of evidence for OSA management, OSA patients, their healthcare providers, and society at large would benefit from refocusing research efforts into the prioritized research questions and away from simple comparisons of short-term outcomes between specific interventions. Citation: Patel K; Moorthy D; Chan JA; Concannon TW. High priority future research needs for obstructive sleep apnea diagnosis and treatment. J Clin Sleep Med 2013

Setting Research Priorities for Patients on or Nearing Dialysis

PubMed Central

Hemmelgarn, Brenda; Lillie, Erin; Dip, Sally Crowe P.G.; Cyr, Annette; Gladish, Michael; Large, Claire; Silverman, Howard; Toth, Brenda; Wolfs, Wim; Laupacis, Andreas

2014-01-01

With increasing emphasis among health care providers and funders on patient-centered care, it follows that patients and their caregivers should be included when priorities for research are being established. This study sought to identify the most important unanswered questions about the management of kidney failure from the perspective of adult patients on or nearing dialysis, their caregivers, and the health care professionals who care for these patients. Research uncertainties were identified through a national Canadian survey of adult patients on or nearing dialysis, their caregivers, and health care professionals. Uncertainties were refined by a steering committee that included patients, caregivers, researchers, and clinicians to assemble a short-list of the top 30 uncertainties. Thirty-four people (11 patients; five caregivers; eight physicians; six nurses; and one social worker, pharmacist, physiotherapist, and dietitian each) from across Canada subsequently participated in a workshop to determine the top 10 research questions. In total, 1570 usable research uncertainties were received from 317 respondents to the survey. Among these, 259 unique uncertainties were identified; after ranking, these were reduced to a short-list of 30 uncertainties. During the in-person workshop, the top 10 research uncertainties were identified, which included questions about enhanced communication among patients and providers, dialysis modality options, itching, access to kidney transplantation, heart health, dietary restrictions, depression, and vascular access. These can be used alongside the results of other research priority–setting exercises to guide researchers in designing future studies and inform health care funders. PMID:24832095

Issues and priorities of medical education research in Asia.

PubMed

Majumder, M A A

2004-03-01

This article addresses the roles, issues, approaches, rationale, pitfalls, priorities and balance of research in medical education, particularly its "disarray" status in Asia. Research in medical education has influenced education in many ways. Most importantly, it provides legitimate evidences to stakeholders on which to make educational decisions. It also has a wider social impact on teaching practice and subsequent clinical practice. However, in Asia, medical educational research has not substantially influenced educational policy and medical practices. Moreover, it fails to receive comparable attention as in developed countries. A number of constraints that have hampered the development of educational research in Asia are identified: low socio-economic condition of the region; cultural and religious values and beliefs of the people; lack of congruence between the mission and vision of medical schools; leadership crisis; lack of financial resources; inadequate exposure to medical educational research in undergraduate training; lack of collaboration and commitment; and unforeseeable short-term outcome of medical education. The article concludes with some specific recommendations to strengthen research and to create a research culture in the region, including active leadership and commitment of the institutes/organisations, careful assessment and strategic settings of the priorities of medical educational research, establishment of a regional centre for medical education research, availability of financial resources, wider dissemination of research findings, collaboration with the developed countries and initiative to publish regional-based medical education journals, including electronic journals. Appropriate research environment and culture will enable stakeholders to obtain evidence-based information from educational research to increase the relevance, quality, cost-effectiveness and equity of medical education and practice in Asia.

Research priorities for advanced fibrous composites

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baumann, K. J.; Swedlow, J. L.

1981-01-01

Priorities for research in advanced laminated fibrous composite materials are presented. Supporting evidence is presented in two bodies, including a general literature survey and a survey of aerospace composite hardware and service experience. Both surveys were undertaken during 1977-1979. Specific results and conclusions indicate that a significant portion of contemporary published research diverges from recommended priorites.

Priorities for research into human resources for health in low- and middle-income countries

PubMed Central

Chopra, Mickey; Atkins, Salla; Dal Poz, Mario Roberto; Bennett, Sara

2010-01-01

Abstract Objective To identify the human resources for health (HRH) policy concerns and research priorities of key stakeholders in low- and middle-income countries; to assess the extent to which existing HRH research addresses these concerns and priorities; and to develop a prioritized list of core research questions requiring immediate attention to facilitate policy development and implementation. Methods The study involved interviews with key informants, including health policy-makers, researchers and community and civil society representatives, in 24 low- and middle-income countries in four regions, a literature search for relevant reviews of research completed to date, and the assessment of interview and literature search findings at a consultative multinational workshop, during which research questions were prioritized. Findings Twenty-one research questions emerged from the key informant interviews, many of which had received little or no attention in the reviewed literature. The questions ranked as most important at the consultative workshop were: (i) To what extent do incentives work in attracting and retaining qualified health workers in underserviced areas? (ii) What is the impact of dual practice and multiple employment? and (iii) How can incentives be used to optimize efficiency and the quality of health care? Conclusion There was a clear consensus about the type of HRH policy problems faced by different countries and the nature of evidence needed to tackle them. Coordinated action to support and implement research into the highest priority questions identified here could have a major impact on health worker policies and, ultimately, on the health of the poor. PMID:20539857

What Are the Top 10 Research Questions in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease? A Priority Setting Partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

PubMed

Hart, Ailsa L; Lomer, Miranda; Verjee, Azmina; Kemp, Karen; Faiz, Omar; Daly, Ann; Solomon, Julie; McLaughlin, John

2017-02-01

Many uncertainties remain regarding optimal therapies and strategies for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Setting research priorities addressing therapies requires a partnership between health care professionals, patients and organisations supporting patients. We aimed to use the structure of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership, which has been used in other disease areas, to identify and prioritise unanswered questions about treatments for inflammatory bowel disease. The James Lind Priority Setting Partnership uses methods agreed and adopted in other disease areas to work with patients and clinicians: to identify uncertainties about treatments; to agree by consensus a prioritised list of uncertainties for research; then to translate these uncertainties into research questions which are amenable to hypothesis testing; and finally to take results to research commissioning bodies to be considered for funding. A total of 1636 uncertainties were collected in the initial survey from 531 respondents, which included 22% health care professionals and 78% patients and carers. Using the rigorously applied processes of the priority setting partnership, this list was distilled down to the top 10 research priorities for inflammatory bowel disease. The top priorities were: identifying treatment strategies to optimise efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness; and stratifying patients with regard to their disease course and treatment response. Diet and symptom control [pain, incontinence and fatigue] were also topics which were prioritised. A partnership involving multidisciplinary clinicians, patients and organisations supporting patients has identified the top 10 research priorities in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. © European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation 2016.

Mental health research priorities in low- and middle-income countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean.

PubMed

Sharan, P; Gallo, C; Gureje, O; Lamberte, E; Mari, J J; Mazzotti, G; Patel, V; Swartz, L; Olifson, S; Levav, I; de Francisco, A; Saxena, S

2009-10-01

Studies suggest a paucity of and lack of prioritisation in mental health research from low- and middle-income (LAMI) countries. To investigate research priorities in mental health among researchers and other stakeholders in LAMI countries. We used a two-stage design that included identification, through literature searches and snowball technique, of researchers and stakeholders in 114 countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean; and a mail survey on priorities in research. The study identified broad agreement between researchers and stakeholders and across regions regarding research priorities. Epidemiology (burden and risk factors), health systems and social science ranked highest for type of research. Depression/anxiety, substance use disorders and psychoses; and children and adolescents, women, and people exposed to violence/trauma were prioritised among the disorders and population groups respectively. Important criteria for prioritising research were burden of disease, social justice, and availability of funds. Stakeholder groups differed in the importance they gave to the personal interest of researchers as a criterion for prioritising research. Researchers' and stakeholders' priorities were consistent with burden of disease estimates, however suicide was underprioritised compared with its burden. Researchers' and stakeholders' priorities were also largely congruent with the researchers' projects. The results of this first ever conducted survey of researchers and stakeholders regarding research priorities in mental health suggest that it should be possible to develop consensus at regional and international levels regarding the research agenda that is necessary to support health system objectives in LAMI countries.

Priorities for research in child maltreatment, intimate partner violence and resilience to violence exposures: results of an international Delphi consensus development process

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) and child maltreatment (CM) are major global public health problems. The Preventing Violence Across the Lifespan (PreVAiL) Research Network, an international group of over 60 researchers and national and international knowledge-user partners in CM and IPV, sought to identify evidence-based research priorities in IPV and CM, with a focus on resilience, using a modified Delphi consensus development process. Methods Review of existing empirical evidence, PreVAiL documents and team discussion identified a starting list of 20 priorities in the following categories: resilience to violence exposure (RES), CM, and IPV, as well as priorities that cross-cut the content areas (CC), and others specific to research methodologies (RM) in violence research. PreVAiL members (N = 47) completed two online survey rounds, and one round of discussions via three teleconference calls to rate, rank and refine research priorities. Results Research priorities were: to examine key elements of promising or successful programmes in RES/CM/IPV to build intervention pilot work; CC: to integrate violence questions into national and international surveys, and RM: to investigate methods for collecting and collating datasets to link data and to conduct pooled, meta and sub-group analyses to identify promising interventions for particular groups. Conclusions These evidence-based research priorities, developed by an international team of violence, gender and mental health researchers and knowledge-user partners, are of relevance for prevention and resilience-oriented research in the areas of IPV and CM. PMID:22908894

Research priorities about stoma-related quality of life from the perspective of people with a stoma: A pilot survey.

PubMed

Hubbard, Gill; Taylor, Claire; Beeken, Becca; Campbell, Anna; Gracey, Jackie; Grimmett, Chloe; Fisher, Abi; Ozakinci, Gozde; Slater, Sarah; Gorely, Trish

2017-12-01

There is a recognized need to include patients in setting research priorities. Research priorities identified by people with a stoma are rarely elicited. To improve the quality of life of people with a stoma through use of evidence-based practice based on research priorities set by patients. Online pilot survey publicized in 2016 via United Kingdom stoma charities. People ranked nine stoma-related quality of life topics in order of research priority. People 16 years of age and over who currently have or have had a stoma for treatment for any medical condition. Distributions of the priority scores for each of the nine research topics were examined. Group differences were explored using either the Mann-Whitney U-test or the Kruskal-Wallis test depending on the number of groups. In total, 225 people completed the survey. The most important research priority was pouch leak problems and stoma bag/appliance problems followed by hernia risk. There were statistically significant differences in ranking research priorities between males and females, age, underlying disease that led to a stoma, stoma type and length of time with a stoma. People with a stoma are willing to engage in and set research priorities. The results should contribute towards future research about setting the research agenda for the study of stoma-related concerns that impact quality of life. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Research Priorities for School Nursing in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

PubMed

Al-Yateem, Nabeel; Docherty, Charles; Brenner, Maria; Alhosany, Jameela; Altawil, Hanan; Al-Tamimi, Muna

2017-10-01

School nurses are challenged with more children having complex conditions, who are now surviving into school age. This is paralleled by a shift in focus of health systems toward primary care, and national efforts to develop the health-care services, especially those offered to vulnerable populations. Being at the forefront of this change, school nurses in United Arab Emirates (UAE) are finding themselves under pressure to adapt to and facilitate these changes both by improving their practice and by contributing to its underpinning evidence. A cross-sectional design was used in this study in which 370 school nurses participated, identifying 11 research priorities. The three most important, as ranked by participants, were management of children with complex health-care needs; nutrition, obesity, and lifestyle issues of schoolchildren; and managing illnesses, injuries, and emergencies in schools and provision of medical support. These priorities should direct future research activities in the field.

The quest for a framework for sustainable and institutionalised priority-setting for health research in a low-resource setting: the case of Zambia.

PubMed

Kapiriri, Lydia; Chanda-Kapata, Pascalina

2018-02-17

Priority-setting for health research in low-income countries remains a major challenge. While there have been efforts to systematise and improve the processes, most of the initiatives have ended up being a one-off exercise and are yet to be institutionalised. This could, in part, be attributed to the limited capacity for the priority-setting institutions to identify and fund their own research priorities, since most of the priority-setting initiatives are driven by experts. This paper reports findings from a pilot project whose aim was to develop a systematic process to identify components of a locally desirable and feasible health research priority-setting approach and to contribute to capacity strengthening for the Zambia National Health Research Authority. Synthesis of the current literature on the approaches to health research prioritisations. The results of the synthesis were presented and discussed with a sample of Zambian researchers and decision-makers who are involved in health research priority-setting. The ultimate aim was for them to explore the different approaches available for guiding health research priority-setting and to identify an approach that would be relevant and feasible to implement and sustain within the Zambian context. Based on the evidence that was presented, the participants were unable to identify one approach that met the criteria. They identified attributes from the different approaches that they thought would be most appropriate and proposed a process that they deemed feasible within the Zambian context. While it is easier to implement prioritisation based on one approach that the initiator might be interested in, researchers interested in capacity-building for health research priority-setting organisations should expose the low-income country participants to all approaches. Researchers ought to be aware that sometimes one shoe may not fit all, as in the case of Zambia, instead of choosing one approach, the stakeholders may select

An approach for setting evidence-based and stakeholder-informed research priorities in low- and middle-income countries.

PubMed

Rehfuess, Eva A; Durão, Solange; Kyamanywa, Patrick; Meerpohl, Joerg J; Young, Taryn; Rohwer, Anke

2016-04-01

To derive evidence-based and stakeholder-informed research priorities for implementation in African settings, the international research consortium Collaboration for Evidence-Based Healthcare and Public Health in Africa (CEBHA+) developed and applied a pragmatic approach. First, an online survey and face-to-face consultation between CEBHA+ partners and policy-makers generated priority research areas. Second, evidence maps for these priority research areas identified gaps and related priority research questions. Finally, study protocols were developed for inclusion within a grant proposal. Policy and practice representatives were involved throughout the process. Tuberculosis, diabetes, hypertension and road traffic injuries were selected as priority research areas. Evidence maps covered screening and models of care for diabetes and hypertension, population-level prevention of diabetes and hypertension and their risk factors, and prevention and management of road traffic injuries. Analysis of these maps yielded three priority research questions on hypertension and diabetes and one on road traffic injuries. The four resulting study protocols employ a broad range of primary and secondary research methods; a fifth promotes an integrated methodological approach across all research activities. The CEBHA+ approach, in particular evidence mapping, helped to formulate research questions and study protocols that would be owned by African partners, fill gaps in the evidence base, address policy and practice needs and be feasible given the existing research infrastructure and expertise. The consortium believes that the continuous involvement of decision-makers throughout the research process is an important means of ensuring that studies are relevant to the African context and that findings are rapidly implemented.

Beef cattle welfare in the USA: identification of priorities for future research.

PubMed

Tucker, Cassandra B; Coetzee, Johann F; Stookey, Joseph M; Thomson, Daniel U; Grandin, Temple; Schwartzkopf-Genswein, Karen S

2015-12-01

This review identifies priorities for beef cattle welfare research in the USA. Based on our professional expertise and synthesis of existing literature, we identify two themes in intensive aspects of beef production: areas where policy-based actions are needed and those where additional research is required. For some topics, considerable research informs best practice, yet gaps remain between scientific knowledge and implementation. For example, many of the risk factors and management strategies to prevent respiratory disease are understood, but only used by a relatively small portion of the industry. This is an animal health issue that will require leadership and discussion to gain widespread adoption of practices that benefit cattle welfare. There is evidence of success when such actions are taken, as illustrated by the recent improvements in handling at US slaughter facilities. Our highest priorities for additional empirical evidence are: the effect of technologies used to either promote growth or manage cattle in feedlots, identification of management risk factors for disease in feedlots, and management decisions about transport (rest stops, feed/water deprivation, climatic conditions, stocking density). Additional research is needed to inform science-based recommendations about environmental features such as dry lying areas (mounds), shade, water and feed, as well as trailer design.

Cancer Treatment–Related Cardiotoxicity: Current State of Knowledge and Future Research Priorities

PubMed Central

Adhikari, Bishow; Brell, Joanna; Davis, Myrtle; Desvigne-Nickens, Patrice; Freedman, Andrew; Minasian, Lori; Force, Thomas; Remick, Scot C.

2014-01-01

Cardiotoxicity resulting from direct myocyte damage has been a known complication of cancer treatment for decades. More recently, the emergence of hypertension as a clinically significant side effect of several new agents has been recognized as adversely affecting cancer treatment outcomes. With cancer patients living longer, in part because of treatment advances, these adverse events have become increasingly important to address. However, little is known about the cardiovascular pathogenic mechanisms associated with cancer treatment and even less about how to optimally prevent and manage short- and long-term cardiovascular complications, leading to improved patient safety and clinical outcomes. To identify research priorities, allocate resources, and establish infrastructure required to address cardiotoxicity associated with cancer treatment, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) sponsored a two-day workshop, “Cancer treatment–related cardiotoxicity: Understanding the current state of knowledge and future research priorities,” in March 2013 in Bethesda, MD. Participants included leading oncology and cardiology researchers and health professionals, patient advocates and industry representatives, with expertise ranging from basic to clinical science. Attendees were charged with identifying research opportunities to advance the understanding of cancer treatment–related cardiotoxicity across basic and clinical science. This commentary highlights the key discussion points and overarching recommendations from that workshop. PMID:25210198

Research Priorities for Economic Analyses of Prevention: Current Issues & Future Directions

PubMed Central

Crowley, D. Max; Hill, Laura Griner; Kuklinski, Margaret R.; Jones, Damon E.

2013-01-01

In response to growing interest in economic analyses of prevention efforts, a diverse group of prevention researchers, economists, and policy analysts convened a scientific panel, on “Research Priorities in Economic Analysis of Prevention” at the 19th annual conference of the Society for Prevention Research. The panel articulated four priorities that, if followed in future research, would make economic analyses of prevention efforts easier to compare and more relevant to policymakers, and community stakeholders. These priorities are: (1) increased standardization of evaluation methods, (2) improved economic valuation of common prevention outcomes, (3) expanded efforts to maximize evaluation generalizability and impact, as well as (4) enhanced transparency and communicability of economic evaluations. In this paper we define three types of economic analyses in prevention, provide context and rationale for these four priorities as well as related sub-priorities, and discuss the challenges inherent in meeting them. PMID:23963624

Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project.

PubMed

Lindson, Nicola; Richards-Doran, Dan; Heath, Laura; Hartmann-Boyce, Jamie

2017-12-01

The Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group (TAG) conducts systematic reviews of the evidence for tobacco cessation and prevention interventions. In 2016 TAG conducted a priority-setting, stakeholder engagement project to identify where further research is needed in the areas of tobacco control and smoking cessation. The project comprised two surveys and a workshop. A range of stakeholders participated, including members of the public (smokers and ex-smokers), clinicians, researchers, research funders, health-care commissioners and public health organizations. The first survey phase identified unanswered research questions in the field of tobacco control. The second phase asked participants to rank these, with overall rankings calculated by combining scores across participants. The workshop allowed attendees to discuss prioritization of topics and questions in more depth. Workshop discussions were transcribed and analysed thematically, and a final voting activity at the close of the workshop allowed participants to choose topics to prioritize and to de-prioritize. A total of 304 stakeholders (researchers, health professionals, smokers and ex-smokers, guideline developers, research funders and policymakers, representing 28 countries) identified 183 unanswered research questions. These were categorized into 15 research categories. A total of 175 participants prioritized categories and questions in the second survey phase, with 'electronic cigarettes'; 'addressing inequalities'; and 'mental health and other substance abuse' prioritized as the top three categories. Forty-three stakeholders attended the workshop and discussed reasons for and against category prioritization. Prioritized research categories largely mirrored those in the survey stage, although 'treatment delivery' also emerged as a key category. Five cross-cutting themes emerged: efficacy; relative efficacy; cost effectiveness; addressing inequalities; and different types of evidence. There are many unanswered

Priorities for Advancing Research on Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Co-Occurring Anxiety

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Vasa, Roma A.; Keefer, Amy; Reaven, Judy; South, Mikle; White, Susan W.

2018-01-01

Research on anxiety disorders in youth with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has burgeoned in the past two decades. Yet, critical gaps exist with respect to measuring and treating anxiety in this population. This study used the nominal group technique to identify the most important research priorities on co-occurring anxiety in ASD. An international…

Proceedings of Workshop on Priority Great Lakes Environmental Research Initiatives (Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Ann Arbor, Michigan, October 10-11, 1974).

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pinsak, Arthur P., Ed.

This publication contains the proceedings of a workshop held in Ann Arbor, Michigan to identify the priority Great Lakes environmental research initiatives. The five major objectives of the workshop include the determination of research initiatives, opportunities for university research communities to discuss and recommend future research…

Moving Forward Through Consensus: A Modified Delphi Approach to Determine the Top Research Priorities in Orthopaedic Oncology.

PubMed

Schneider, Patricia Jacqueline; Evaniew, Nathan; McKay, Paula; Ghert, Michelle

2017-12-01

Several challenges presently impede the conduct of prospective clinical studies in orthopaedic oncology, including limited financial resources to support their associated costs and inadequate patient volume at most single institutions. This study was conducted to prioritize research questions within the field so that the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS), and other relevant professional societies, can direct the limited human and fiscal resources available to address the priorities that the stakeholders involved believe will have the most meaningful impact on orthopaedic oncology patient care. The purpose of this study was to use a formal consensus-based approach involving clinician-scientists and other stakeholders to identify the top priority research questions for future international prospective clinical studies in orthopaedic oncology. A three-step modified Delphi process involving multiple stakeholder groups (including orthopaedic oncologists, research personnel, funding agency representation, and patient representation) was conducted. First, we sent an electronic questionnaire to all participants to solicit clinically relevant research questions (61 participants; 54% of the original 114 individuals invited to participate returned the questionnaires). Then, participants rated the candidate research questions using a 5-point Likert scale for five criteria (60 participants; 53% of the original group participated in this portion of the process). Research questions that met a priori consensus thresholds progressed for consideration to an in-person consensus meeting, which was attended by 44 participants (39% of the original group; 12 countries were represented at this meeting). After the consensus panel's discussion, members individually assigned scores to each question using a 9-point Likert scale. Research questions that met preset criteria advanced to final ranking, and panel members individually ranked their top three priority research questions, resulting

Identifying the Priority Topics for the Assessment of Competence in Care of the Elderly

PubMed Central

Frank, Chris C.; Allen, Tim; Lozanovska, Tatjana; Arcand, Marcel; Feldman, Sidney; Lam, Robert E.; Mehta, Pravinsagar G.; Mangal, Nadia Y.

2018-01-01

Background With Canada’s senior population increasing, there is greater demand for family physicians with enhanced skills in Care of the Elderly (COE). The College of Family Physicians Canada (CFPC) has introduced Certificates of Added Competence (CACs), one being in COE. Our objective is to summarize the process used to determine the Priority Topics for the assessment of competence in COE. Methods A modified Delphi technique was used, with online surveys and face-to-face meetings. The Working Group (WG) of six physicians acted as the nominal group, and a larger group of randomly selected practitioners from across Canada acted as the Validation Group (VG). The WG, and then the VG, completed electronic write-in surveys that asked them to identify the Priority Topics. Responses were compiled, coded, and tabulated to identify the topics and to calculate the frequencies of their selection. The WG used face-to-face meetings and iterative discussion to decide on the final topic names. Results The correlation between the initial Priority Topic list identified by the VG and that identified by the WG is 0.6793. The final list has 18 Priority Topics. Conclusion Defining the required competencies is a first step to establishing national standards in COE. PMID:29581816

Setting Priorities for Space Research: Opportunities and Imperatives

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dutton, John A.; Abelson, Philip H.; Beckwith, Steven V. W.; Bishop, William P.; Byerly, Radford, Jr.; Crowe, Lawson; Dews, Peter; Garriott, Owen K.; Lunine, Jonathan; Macauley, Molly K.

1992-01-01

This report represents the first phase of a study by a task group convened by the Space Studies Board to ascertain whether it should attempt to develop a methodology for recommending priorities among the various initiatives in space research (that is, scientific activities concerned with phenomena in space or utilizing observations from space). The report argues that such priority statements by the space research community are both necessary and desirable and would contribute to the formulation and implementation of public policy. The report advocates the establishment of priorities to enhance effective management of the nation's scientific research program in space. It argues that scientific objectives and purposes should determine how and under what circumstances scientific research should be done. The report does not take a position on the controversy between advocates of manned space exploration and those who favor the exclusive use of unmanned space vehicles. Nor does the report address questions about the value or appropriateness of Space Station Freedom or proposals to establish a permanent manned Moon base or to undertake a manned mission to Mars. These issues lie beyond the charge to the task group.

Identifying conservation priorities and management strategies based on ecosystem services to improve urban sustainability in Harbin, China.

PubMed

Qu, Yi; Lu, Ming

2018-01-01

Rapid urbanization and agricultural development has resulted in the degradation of ecosystems, while also negatively impacting ecosystem services (ES) and urban sustainability. Identifying conservation priorities for ES and applying reasonable management strategies have been found to be effective methods for mitigating this phenomenon. The purpose of this study is to propose a comprehensive framework for identifying ES conservation priorities and associated management strategies for these planning areas. First, we incorporated 10 ES indicators within a systematic conservation planning (SCP) methodology in order to identify ES conservation priorities with high irreplaceability values based on conservation target goals associated with the potential distribution of ES indicators. Next, we assessed the efficiency of the ES conservation priorities for meeting the designated conservation target goals. Finally, ES conservation priorities were clustered into groups using a K-means clustering analysis in an effort to identify the dominant ES per location before formulating management strategies. We effectively identified 12 ES priorities to best represent conservation target goals for the ES indicators. These 12 priorities had a total areal coverage of 13,364 km 2 representing 25.16% of the study area. The 12 priorities were further clustered into five significantly different groups ( p -values between groups < 0.05), which helped to refine management strategies formulated to best enhance ES across the study area. The proposed method allows conservation and management plans to easily adapt to a wide variety of quantitative ES target goals within urban and agricultural areas, thereby preventing urban and agriculture sprawl and guiding sustainable urban development.

Identifying conservation priorities and management strategies based on ecosystem services to improve urban sustainability in Harbin, China

PubMed Central

2018-01-01

Rapid urbanization and agricultural development has resulted in the degradation of ecosystems, while also negatively impacting ecosystem services (ES) and urban sustainability. Identifying conservation priorities for ES and applying reasonable management strategies have been found to be effective methods for mitigating this phenomenon. The purpose of this study is to propose a comprehensive framework for identifying ES conservation priorities and associated management strategies for these planning areas. First, we incorporated 10 ES indicators within a systematic conservation planning (SCP) methodology in order to identify ES conservation priorities with high irreplaceability values based on conservation target goals associated with the potential distribution of ES indicators. Next, we assessed the efficiency of the ES conservation priorities for meeting the designated conservation target goals. Finally, ES conservation priorities were clustered into groups using a K-means clustering analysis in an effort to identify the dominant ES per location before formulating management strategies. We effectively identified 12 ES priorities to best represent conservation target goals for the ES indicators. These 12 priorities had a total areal coverage of 13,364 km2 representing 25.16% of the study area. The 12 priorities were further clustered into five significantly different groups (p-values between groups < 0.05), which helped to refine management strategies formulated to best enhance ES across the study area. The proposed method allows conservation and management plans to easily adapt to a wide variety of quantitative ES target goals within urban and agricultural areas, thereby preventing urban and agriculture sprawl and guiding sustainable urban development. PMID:29682412

Exploring levers and barriers to accessing primary care for marginalised groups and identifying their priorities for primary care provision: a participatory learning and action research study.

PubMed

O'Donnell, Patrick; Tierney, Edel; O'Carroll, Austin; Nurse, Diane; MacFarlane, Anne

2016-12-03

The involvement of patients and the public in healthcare has grown significantly in recent decades and is documented in health policy documents internationally. Many benefits of involving these groups in primary care planning have been reported. However, these benefits are rarely felt by those considered marginalised in society and they are often excluded from participating in the process of planning primary care. It has been recommended to employ suitable approaches, such as co-operative and participatory initiatives, to enable marginalised groups to highlight their priorities for care. This Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) research study involved 21 members of various marginalised groups who contributed their views about access to primary care. Using a series of PLA techniques for data generation and co-analysis, we explored barriers and facilitators to primary healthcare access from the perspective of migrants, Irish Travellers, homeless people, drug users, sex workers and people living in deprivation, and identified their priorities for action with regard to primary care provision. Four overarching themes were identified: the home environment, the effects of the 'two-tier' healthcare system on engagement, healthcare encounters, and the complex health needs of many in those groups. The study demonstrates that there are many complicated personal and structural barriers to accessing primary healthcare for marginalised groups. There were shared and differential experiences across the groups. Participants also expressed shared priorities for action in the planning and running of primary care services. Members of marginalised groups have shared priorities for action to improve their access to primary care. If steps are taken to address these, there is scope to impact on more than one marginalised group and to address the existing health inequities.

A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice.

PubMed

Viergever, Roderik F; Olifson, Sylvie; Ghaffar, Abdul; Terry, Robert F

2010-12-15

Health research priority setting processes assist researchers and policymakers in effectively targeting research that has the greatest potential public health benefit. Many different approaches to health research prioritization exist, but there is no agreement on what might constitute best practice. Moreover, because of the many different contexts for which priorities can be set, attempting to produce one best practice is in fact not appropriate, as the optimal approach varies per exercise. Therefore, following a literature review and an analysis of health research priority setting exercises that were organized or coordinated by the World Health Organization since 2005, we propose a checklist for health research priority setting that allows for informed choices on different approaches and outlines nine common themes of good practice. It is intended to provide generic assistance for planning health research prioritization processes. The checklist explains what needs to be clarified in order to establish the context for which priorities are set; it reviews available approaches to health research priority setting; it offers discussions on stakeholder participation and information gathering; it sets out options for use of criteria and different methods for deciding upon priorities; and it emphasizes the importance of well-planned implementation, evaluation and transparency.

Organic crop production's top research priority: Pestiphytology

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Pestiphytology is the study of pest plants, commonly referred to as weeds. In a recent national survey, weed research was designated as the top research priority by organic producers. Manual weed control is a costly practice that can quickly decrease return on investment, while the absence of weed...

Research Priorities for Fertility and Conception Research as Identified by Multidisciplinary Health Care Practitioners and Researchers.

PubMed

Moran, Lisa J; Spencer, Laura; Russell, Darryl L; Hull, Mary Louise; Robertson, Sarah A; Varcoe, Tamara J; Davies, Michael J; Brown, Hannah M; Rodgers, Raymond J

2016-01-13

The Robinson Research Institute of the University of Adelaide convened a multidisciplinary group of n = 33 clinicians, researchers and representatives of government organisations on the 2 October 2014 for a workshop entitled "Promoting fertility and healthy conception. How do we generate greater reproductive health awareness?" The key aim of the workshop was to assess the body of knowledge that informs clinical practice and government policy, and to identify questions and additional information needed by health practitioners and government representatives working in the field of reproductive health and to frame future research and policy. The workshop identified topics that fell mostly into three categories: lifestyle-related, societal and biological factors. The lifestyle topics included nutrition and diet, exercise, obesity, shift work and other factors deemed to be modifiable at the level of the individual. The societal topics included discussions of matters that are structural, and resistant to change by individuals, including specific ethical issues, social disadvantage, government and educational policies. The biological factors are intrinsic physical states of the individual, and included many factors where there is a dense body of scientific knowledge which may not be readily accessible in less academic language. This workshop thus provided an opportunity to identify further actions that could be undertaken to meet the needs of diverse organisations and groups of professionals with an interest in human fertility. Since so many factors in our social and biological environment can impact fertility and preconception health, it is imperative to involve many disciplines or levels of government or societal organisations that have not traditionally been involved in this area.

A study of clinical nursing research priorities in aged care: a Hong Kong perspective.

PubMed

Chang, Esther; Ho, Carey Kit Bing; Yuen, Anders Chi Man; Hatcher, Deborah

2003-10-01

The aim of this study was to identify clinical research priorities in aged care from the perspectives of rehabilitation aged care nurses in Hong Kong. The Delphi method was used whereby 33 registered nurses working in an aged care rehabilitation ward identified 28 research questions pertaining to areas in which nurses could take a leadership role: clinical research that is of highest value to patients and nurse specialists; clinical research which would provide improved community care; facilitate health promotion and disease prevention and be of value to the professional needs of clinical nurses. Study findings have implications and provide direction for clinical nursing research in aged care.

The mycetoma knowledge gap: identification of research priorities.

PubMed

van de Sande, Wendy W J; Maghoub, El Sheikh; Fahal, Ahmed H; Goodfellow, Michael; Welsh, Oliverio; Zijlstra, Ed

2014-03-01

Mycetoma is a tropical disease which is caused by a taxonomically diverse range of actinomycetes (actinomycetoma) and fungi (eumycetoma). The disease was only recently listed by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a neglected tropical disease (NTD). This recognition is the direct result of a meeting held in Geneva on February 1, 2013, in which experts on the disease from around the world met to identify the key research priorities needed to combat mycetoma. The areas that need to be addressed are highlighted here. The initial priority is to establish the incidence and prevalence of the disease in regions where mycetoma is endemic, prior to determining the primary reservoirs of the predominant causal agents and their mode of transmission to susceptible individuals in order to establish novel interventions that will reduce the impact of the disease on individuals, families, and communities. Critically, economical, reliable, and effective methods are required to achieve early diagnosis of infections and consequential improved therapeutic outcomes. Molecular techniques and serological assays were considered the most promising in the development of novel diagnostic tools to be used in endemic settings. Improved strategies for treating eumycetoma and actinomycetoma are also considered.

Research Questions and Priorities for Tuberculosis: A Survey of Published Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

PubMed Central

Nicolau, Ioana; Ling, Daphne; Tian, Lulu; Lienhardt, Christian; Pai, Madhukar

2012-01-01

Background Systematic reviews are increasingly informing policies in tuberculosis (TB) care and control. They may also be a source of questions for future research. As part of the process of developing the International Roadmap for TB Research, we did a systematic review of published systematic reviews on TB, to identify research priorities that are most frequently suggested in reviews. Methodology/Principal Findings We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on any aspect of TB published between 2005 and 2010. One reviewer extracted data and a second reviewer independently extracted data from a random subset of included studies. In total, 137 systematic reviews, with 141 research questions, were included in this review. We used the UK Health Research Classification System (HRCS) to help us classify the research questions and priorities. The three most common research topics were in the area of detection, screening and diagnosis of TB (32.6%), development and evaluation of treatments and therapeutic interventions (23.4%), and TB aetiology and risk factors (19.9%). The research priorities determined were mainly focused on the discovery and evaluation of bacteriological TB tests and drug-resistant TB tests and immunological tests. Other important topics of future research were genetic susceptibility linked to TB and disease determinants attributed to HIV/TB. Evaluation of drug treatments for TB, drug-resistant TB and HIV/TB were also frequently proposed research topics. Conclusions Systematic reviews are a good source of key research priorities. Findings from our survey have informed the development of the International Roadmap for TB Research by the TB Research Movement. PMID:22848764

Research priorities of the Canadian chiropractic profession: a consensus study using a modified Delphi technique.

PubMed

French, Simon D; Beliveau, Peter J H; Bruno, Paul; Passmore, Steven R; Hayden, Jill A; Srbely, John; Kawchuk, Greg N

2017-01-01

Research funds are limited and a healthcare profession that supports research activity should establish research priority areas. The study objective was to identify research priority areas for the Canadian chiropractic profession, and for stakeholders in the chiropractic profession to rank these in order of importance. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus study between August 2015 and May 2017 to determine the views of Canadian chiropractic organisations (e.g. Canadian Chiropractic Association; provincial associations) and stakeholder groups (e.g. chiropractic educational institutions; researchers). Participants completed three online Delphi survey rounds. In Round 1, participants suggested research areas within four broad research themes: 1) Basic science; 2) Clinical; 3) Health services; and 4) Population health. In Round 2, researchers created sub-themes by categorising the areas suggested in Round 1, and participants judged the importance of the research sub-themes. We defined consensus as at least 70% of participants agreeing that a research area was "essential" or "very important". In Round 3, results from Round 2 were presented to the participants to re-evaluate the importance of sub-themes. Finally, participants completed an online pairwise ranking activity to determine the rank order of the list of important research sub-themes. Fifty-seven participants, of 85 people invited, completed Round 1 (response rate 67%). Fifty-six participants completed Round 2, 55 completed Round 3, and 53 completed the ranking activity. After three Delphi rounds and the pairwise ranking activity was completed, the ranked list of research sub-themes considered important were: 1) Integration of chiropractic care into multidisciplinary settings; 2) Costs and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care; 3) Effect of chiropractic care on reducing medical services; 4) Effects of chiropractic care; 5) Safety/side effects of chiropractic care; 6) Chiropractic care for older adults; 7

Assessing the extent to which current clinical research is consistent with patient priorities: a scoping review using a case study in patients on or nearing dialysis.

PubMed

Jun, Min; Manns, Braden; Laupacis, Andreas; Manns, Liam; Rehal, Bhavdeep; Crowe, Sally; Hemmelgarn, Brenda R

2015-01-01

There is growing acknowledgement that engaging patients to identify their research priorities is important. Using a case study of patients on or nearing dialysis, we sought to assess the extent to which recently completed and ongoing clinical research was consistent with priorities identified by patients, caregivers, and clinicians. Over a 4-year sampling frame (January 2010 to December 2013), we systematically searched the medical literature (top 5 nephrology and top 10 general medicine journals accessed through MEDLINE via Ovid), international randomized controlled trial (RCT) registries, and national government and kidney research funding organizations (Canada, U.S., Australia, and U.K.) for published clinical studies, registered RCTs, and funded clinical studies, respectively. Published clinical studies, registered RCTs, and funded clinical studies were categorized as to whether or not they were consistent with the top 10 research priorities identified by patients, their caregivers, and clinicians in a recent comprehensive research priority setting exercise. The search yielded 4293 published articles, 688 RCTs, and 70 funded studies, of which 1116 articles, 315 RCTs, and 70 funded studies were eligible for inclusion. Overall 194 published studies (17.4 %), 71 RCTs (22.5 %), and 15 funded studies (21.4 %) included topics consistent with the top 10 research priorities identified by patients. Four of the top 10 research priorities, including strategies to improve the management of itching, increase access to kidney transplantation, assess the psychosocial impact of kidney failure, and determine the effects of dietary restriction received virtually no attention. The top 10 priorities we used to categorize included studies were identified by Canadian patients, caregivers, and clinicians. The top research priorities may vary across different countries. The proportion of published studies that are consistent with the top 10 priorities could be different in

Are we studying what matters? Health priorities and NIH-funded biomedical engineering research.

PubMed

Rubin, Jessica B; Paltiel, A David; Saltzman, W Mark

2010-07-01

With the founding of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) in 1999, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) made explicit its dedication to expanding research in biomedical engineering. Ten years later, we sought to examine how closely federal funding for biomedical engineering aligns with U.S. health priorities. Using a publicly accessible database of research projects funded by the NIH in 2008, we identified 641 grants focused on biomedical engineering, 48% of which targeted specific diseases. Overall, we found that these disease-specific NIH-funded biomedical engineering research projects align with national health priorities, as quantified by three commonly utilized measures of disease burden: cause of death, disability-adjusted survival losses, and expenditures. However, we also found some illnesses (e.g., cancer and heart disease) for which the number of research projects funded deviated from our expectations, given their disease burden. Our findings suggest several possibilities for future studies that would serve to further inform the allocation of limited research dollars within the field of biomedical engineering.

Research priorities for the environment, agriculture and infectious diseases of poverty.

PubMed

2013-01-01

This report reviews the connections between environmental change, modern agricultural practices and the occurrence of infectious diseases - especially those of poverty; proposes a multi-criteria decision analysis approach to determining the key research priorities; and explores the benefits and limitations of a more systems-based approach to conceptualizing and investigating the problem. The report is the output of the Thematic Reference Group on Environment, Agriculture and Infectious Diseases of Poverty (TRG 4), part of an independent think tank of international experts, established and funded by the Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR) to identify key research priorities through review of research evidence and input from stakeholder consultations. The report concludes that mitigating the outcomes on human health will require far-reaching strategies - spanning the environment, climate, agriculture, social-ecological, microbial and public-health sectors; as well as inter-disciplinary research and intersectoral action. People will also need to modify their way of thinking and engage beyond their own specialities, since the challenges are systemic and are amplified by the increasing inter-connectedness of human populations. This is one of a series of disease and thematic reference group reports that have come out of the TDR Think Tank, all of which have contributed to the development of the Global Report for Research on Infectious Diseases of Poverty, available at www.who.int/tdr/capacity/global_report.

Bioterrorism and biological threats dominate federal health security research; other priorities get scant attention.

PubMed

Shelton, Shoshana R; Connor, Kathryn; Uscher-Pines, Lori; Pillemer, Francesca Matthews; Mullikin, James M; Kellermann, Arthur L

2012-12-01

The federal government plays a critical role in achieving national health security by providing strategic guidance and funding research to help prevent, respond to, mitigate, and recover from disasters, epidemics, and acts of terrorism. In this article we describe the first-ever inventory of nonclassified national health security-related research funded by civilian agencies of the federal government. Our analysis revealed that the US government's portfolio of health security research is currently weighted toward bioterrorism and emerging biological threats, laboratory methods, and development of biological countermeasures. Eight of ten other priorities identified in the Department of Health and Human Services' National Health Security Strategy-such as developing and maintaining a national health security workforce or incorporating recovery into planning and response-receive scant attention. We offer recommendations to better align federal spending with health security research priorities, including the creation of an interagency working group charged with minimizing research redundancy and filling persistent gaps in knowledge.

Research priorities in cancer cachexia: The University of Rochester Cancer Center NCI Community Oncology Research Program Research Base Symposium on Cancer Cachexia and Sarcopenia.

PubMed

Dunne, Richard F; Mustian, Karen M; Garcia, Jose M; Dale, William; Hayward, Reid; Roussel, Breton; Buschmann, Mary M; Caan, Bette J; Cole, Calvin L; Fleming, Fergal J; Chakkalakal, Joe V; Linehan, David C; Hezel, Aram F; Mohile, Supriya G

2017-12-01

Cancer cachexia remains understudied and there are no standard treatments available despite the publication of an international consensus definition and the completion of several large phase III intervention trials in the past 6 years. In September 2015, The University of Rochester Cancer Center NCORP Research Base led a Symposium on Cancer Cachexia and Sarcopenia with goals of reviewing the state of the science, identifying knowledge gaps, and formulating research priorities in cancer cachexia through active discussion and consensus. Research priorities that emerged from the discussion included the implementation of morphometrics into clinical decision making, establishing specific diagnostic criteria for the stages of cachexia, expanding patient selection in intervention trials, identifying clinically meaningful trial endpoints, and the investigation of exercise as an intervention for cancer cachexia. Standardizing how we define and measure cancer cachexia, targeting its complex biologic mechanisms, enrolling patients early in their disease course, and evaluating exercise, either alone or in combination, were proposed as initiatives that may ultimately result in the improved design of cancer cachexia therapeutic trials.

Menstrual hygiene management among adolescent schoolgirls in low- and middle-income countries: research priorities.

PubMed

Phillips-Howard, Penelope A; Caruso, Bethany; Torondel, Belen; Zulaika, Garazi; Sahin, Murat; Sommer, Marni

2016-01-01

A lack of adequate guidance on menstrual management; water, disposal, and private changing facilities; and sanitary hygiene materials in low- and middle-income countries leaves schoolgirls with limited options for healthy personal hygiene during monthly menses. While a plethora of observational studies have described how menstrual hygiene management (MHM) barriers in school impact girls' dignity, well-being, and engagement in school activities, studies have yet to confirm if inadequate information and facilities for MHM significantly affects quantifiable school and health outcomes influencing girls' life chances. Evidence on these hard outcomes will take time to accrue; however, a current lack of standardized methods, tools, and research funding is hampering progress and must be addressed. Compile research priorities for MHM and types of research methods that can be used. In this article, we highlight the current knowledge gaps in school-aged girls' MHM research, and identify opportunities for addressing the dearth of hard evidence limiting the ability of governments, donors, and other agencies to appropriately target resources. We outline a series of research priorities and methodologies that were drawn from an expert panel to address global priorities for MHM in schools for the next 10 years. A strong evidence base for different settings, standardized definitions regarding MHM outcomes, improved study designs and methodologies, and the creation of an MHM research consortia to focus attention on this neglected global issue.

Using patients’ experiences to identify priorities for quality improvement in breast cancer care: patient narratives, surveys or both?

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Patients’ experiences have become central to assessing the performance of healthcare systems worldwide and are increasingly being used to inform quality improvement processes. This paper explores the relative value of surveys and detailed patient narratives in identifying priorities for improving breast cancer services as part of a quality improvement process. Methods One dataset was collected using a narrative interview approach, (n = 13) and the other using a postal survey (n = 82). Datasets were analyzed separately and then compared to determine whether similar priorities for improving patient experiences were identified. Results There were both similarities and differences in the improvement priorities arising from each approach. Day surgery was specifically identified as a priority in the narrative dataset but included in the survey recommendations only as part of a broader priority around improving inpatient experience. Both datasets identified appointment systems, patients spending enough time with staff, information about treatment and side effects and more information at the end of treatment as priorities. The specific priorities identified by the narrative interviews commonly related to ‘relational’ aspects of patient experience. Those identified by the survey typically related to more ‘functional’ aspects and were not always sufficiently detailed to identify specific improvement actions. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that whilst local survey data may act as a screening tool to identify potential problems within the breast cancer service, they do not always provide sufficient detail of what to do to improve that service. These findings may have wider applicability in other services. We recommend using an initial preliminary survey, with better use of survey open comments, followed by an in-depth qualitative analysis to help deliver improvements to relational and functional aspects of patient experience. PMID:22913525

Identifying Continuous Quality Improvement Priorities in Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting.

PubMed

Preskitt, Julie; Fifolt, Matthew; Ginter, Peter M; Rucks, Andrew; Wingate, Martha S

2016-01-01

The purpose of this article was to describe a methodology to identify continuous quality improvement (CQI) priorities for one state's Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program from among the 40 required constructs associated with 6 program benchmarks. The authors discuss how the methodology provided consensus on system CQI quality measure priorities and describe variation among the 3 service delivery models used within the state. Q-sort methodology was used by home visiting (HV) service delivery providers (home visitors) to prioritize HV quality measures for the overall state HV system as well as their service delivery model. There was general consensus overall and among the service delivery models on CQI quality measure priorities, although some variation was observed. Measures associated with Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting benchmark 1, Improved Maternal and Newborn Health, and benchmark 3, Improvement in School Readiness and Achievement, were the highest ranked. The Q-sort exercise allowed home visitors an opportunity to examine priorities within their service delivery model as well as for the overall First Teacher HV system. Participants engaged in meaningful discussions regarding how and why they selected specific quality measures and developed a greater awareness and understanding of a systems approach to HV within the state. The Q-sort methodology presented in this article can easily be replicated by other states to identify CQI priorities at the local and state levels and can be used effectively in states that use a single HV service delivery model or those that implement multiple evidence-based models for HV service delivery.

76 FR 17808 - Final Vehicle Safety Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2011-2013

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-31

... [Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0108] Final Vehicle Safety Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2011- 2013 AGENCY... availability. SUMMARY: This document announces the availability of the Final NHTSA Vehicle Safety and Fuel.... This Priority Plan is an update to the Final Vehicle Safety Rulemaking and Research Priority Plan 2009...

How Are Health Research Priorities Set in Low and Middle Income Countries? A Systematic Review of Published Reports

PubMed Central

McGregor, Skye; Henderson, Klara J.; Kaldor, John M.

2014-01-01

Background Priority setting is increasingly recognised as essential for directing finite resources to support research that maximizes public health benefits and drives health equity. Priority setting processes have been undertaken in a number of low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, using a variety of methods. We undertook a critical review of reports of these processes. Methods and Findings We searched electronic databases and online for peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature. We found 91 initiatives that met inclusion criteria. The majority took place at the global level (46%). For regional or national initiatives, most focused on Sub Saharan Africa (49%), followed by East Asia and Pacific (20%) and Latin America and the Caribbean (18%). A quarter of initiatives aimed to cover all areas of health research, with a further 20% covering communicable diseases. The most frequently used process was a conference or workshop to determine priorities (24%), followed by the Child Health and Nutrition Initiative (CHNRI) method (18%). The majority were initiated by an international organization or collaboration (46%). Researchers and government were the most frequently represented stakeholders. There was limited evidence of any implementation or follow-up strategies. Challenges in priority setting included engagement with stakeholders, data availability, and capacity constraints. Conclusions Health research priority setting (HRPS) has been undertaken in a variety of LMIC settings. While not consistently used, the application of established methods provides a means of identifying health research priorities in a repeatable and transparent manner. In the absence of published information on implementation or evaluation, it is not possible to assess what the impact and effectiveness of health research priority setting may have been. PMID:25275315

Background and Discussion Questions for Identifying Priority Chemicals for Review and Assessment

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

This discussion guide is intended to be used to help structure public input during the September 2011 webinar and discussion forum addressing the prioritization factors and data sources EPA plans to use to identify priority chemicals for review.

International consultation on long-term global health research priorities, research capacity and research uptake in developing countries.

PubMed

Conalogue, David Mc; Kinn, Sue; Mulligan, Jo-Ann; McNeil, Malcolm

2017-03-21

In recognition of the need for long-term planning for global health research, and to inform future global health research priorities, the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DfID) carried out a public consultation between May and June 2015. The consultation aimed to elicit views on the (1) the long-term future global health research priorities; (2) areas likely to be less important over time; (3) how to improve research uptake in low-income countries; and (4) how to build research capacity in low-income countries. An online consultation was used to survey a wide range of participants on global health research priorities. The qualitative data was analysed using a thematic analysis, with frequency of codes in responses tabulated to approximate relative importance of themes and sub-themes. The public consultation yielded 421 responses. The survey responses confirmed the growing importance of non-communicable disease as a global health research priority, being placed above infectious diseases. Participants felt that the key area for reducing funding prioritisation was infectious diseases. The involvement of policymakers and other key stakeholders was seen as critical to drive research uptake, as was collaboration and partnership. Several methods to build research capacity in low-income countries were described, including capacity building educational programmes, mentorship programmes and research institution collaboration and partnership. The outcomes from this consultation survey provide valuable insights into how DfID stakeholders prioritise research. The outcomes from this survey were reviewed alongside other elements of a wider DfID consultation process to help inform long-term research prioritisation of global health research. There are limitations in this approach; the opportunistic nature of the survey's dissemination means the findings presented may not be representative of the full range of stakeholders or views.

78 FR 28543 - Proposed Priority-National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Rehabilitation...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-15

... Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers AGENCY... priority under the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this notice proposes a priority...

78 FR 26560 - Proposed Priority-National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Rehabilitation...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-07

... Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers AGENCY... priority for the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this notice proposes a priority...

Comparing two sampling methods to engage hard-to-reach communities in research priority setting.

PubMed

Valerio, Melissa A; Rodriguez, Natalia; Winkler, Paula; Lopez, Jaime; Dennison, Meagen; Liang, Yuanyuan; Turner, Barbara J

2016-10-28

Effective community-partnered and patient-centered outcomes research needs to address community priorities. However, optimal sampling methods to engage stakeholders from hard-to-reach, vulnerable communities to generate research priorities have not been identified. In two similar rural, largely Hispanic communities, a community advisory board guided recruitment of stakeholders affected by chronic pain using a different method in each community: 1) snowball sampling, a chain- referral method or 2) purposive sampling to recruit diverse stakeholders. In both communities, three groups of stakeholders attended a series of three facilitated meetings to orient, brainstorm, and prioritize ideas (9 meetings/community). Using mixed methods analysis, we compared stakeholder recruitment and retention as well as priorities from both communities' stakeholders on mean ratings of their ideas based on importance and feasibility for implementation in their community. Of 65 eligible stakeholders in one community recruited by snowball sampling, 55 (85 %) consented, 52 (95 %) attended the first meeting, and 36 (65 %) attended all 3 meetings. In the second community, the purposive sampling method was supplemented by convenience sampling to increase recruitment. Of 69 stakeholders recruited by this combined strategy, 62 (90 %) consented, 36 (58 %) attended the first meeting, and 26 (42 %) attended all 3 meetings. Snowball sampling recruited more Hispanics and disabled persons (all P < 0.05). Despite differing recruitment strategies, stakeholders from the two communities identified largely similar ideas for research, focusing on non-pharmacologic interventions for management of chronic pain. Ratings on importance and feasibility for community implementation differed only on the importance of massage services (P = 0.045) which was higher for the purposive/convenience sampling group and for city improvements/transportation services (P = 0.004) which was higher for the

Research Priorities in the Field of Posttraumatic Pain and Disability: Results of a Transdisciplinary Consensus-Generating Workshop

PubMed Central

Elliott, James M.; Lee, Joshua; Loh, Eldon; Schabrun, Siobhan; Siqueira, Walter L.; Corneil, Brian D.; Aal, Bill; Birmingham, Trevor; Brown, Amy; Dickey, James P.; Dixon, S. Jeffrey; Fraser, Douglas D.; Gati, Joseph S.; Gloor, Gregory B.; Good, Gordon; Holdsworth, David; McLean, Samuel A.; Millard, Wanda; Miller, Jordan; Sadi, Jackie; Seminowicz, David A.; Shoemaker, J. Kevin; Siegmund, Gunter P.; Vertseegh, Theodore; Wideman, Timothy H.

2016-01-01

Background. Chronic or persistent pain and disability following noncatastrophic “musculoskeletal” (MSK) trauma is a pervasive public health problem. Recent intervention trials have provided little evidence of benefit from several specific treatments for preventing chronic problems. Such findings may appear to argue against formal targeted intervention for MSK traumas. However, these negative findings may reflect a lack of understanding of the causal mechanisms underlying the transition from acute to chronic pain, rendering informed and objective treatment decisions difficult. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis (IMHA) has recently identified better understanding of causal mechanisms as one of three priority foci of their most recent strategic plan. Objectives. A 2-day invitation-only active participation workshop was held in March 2015 that included 30 academics, clinicians, and consumers with the purpose of identifying consensus research priorities in the field of trauma-related MSK pain and disability, prediction, and prevention. Methods. Conversations were recorded, explored thematically, and member-checked for accuracy. Results. From the discussions, 13 themes were generated that ranged from a focus on identifying causal mechanisms and models to challenges with funding and patient engagement. Discussion. Novel priorities included the inclusion of consumer groups in research from the early conceptualization and design stages and interdisciplinary longitudinal studies that include evaluation of integrated phenotypes and mechanisms. PMID:27445598

Research Priorities in Geriatric Palliative Care: Multimorbidity

PubMed Central

Zulman, Donna M.

2013-01-01

Abstract With global aging and scientific advances extending survival, the number of adults experiencing multiple chronic conditions has grown substantially and is projected to increase by another third between 2000 and 2030. Among the many challenges posed by multimorbidity, some of the most pressing include how to characterize and measure comorbid conditions, understand symptoms and illness burden, and provide person-centered care in the context of competing health care priorities and increasing complexity. In this white paper emanating from a National Institute on Aging supported conference to discuss research gaps at the geriatrics–palliative care interface, the authors review common definitions of multimorbidity; describe the association between multimorbidity and quality of life, functional status, quality of care, and health care utilization; note content and methodological gaps in multimorbidity evidence; and make recommendations regarding research priorities in this area of expanding public health impact. PMID:23777331

Health Research and Millennium Development Goals: Identifying the Gap From Public Health Perspective.

PubMed

El Lawindi, Mona I; Galal, Yasmine S; Khairy, Walaa A

2015-08-23

Assessing the research output within the universities could provide an effective means for tracking the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) progress. This analytical database study was designed to assess the trend of research theses conducted by the Public Health Department (PHD), Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University during the period 1990 to 2014 as related to the: MDGS, Faculty and department research priority plans and to identify the discrepancies between researchers' priorities versus national and international research priorities. A manual search of the theses was done at the Postgraduate Library using a specially designed checklist to chart adherence of each thesis to: MDGs, Faculty and department research plans (RPs). The theses' profile showed that the highest research output was for addressing the MDGS followed by the PHD and Faculty RPs. Compliance to MDGs 5 and 6 was obvious, whereas; MDGs 2, 3, and 7 were not represented at all after year 2000. No significant difference was found between PH theses addressing the Faculty RPs and those which were not before and after 2010. A significantly lower percent of PH theses was fulfilling the PHD research priorities compared to those which were not after 2010. This study showed a definite decline in research output tackling the MDGS and PHD research priorities, with a non-significant increase in the production of theses addressing the Faculty RPs. The present study is a practical model for policy makers within the universities to develop and implement a reliable monitoring and evaluation system for assessment of research output.

Proceedings of the National Conference on Professional Priorities. [Research.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, Hastings-on-Hudson, NY.

The following papers on research in foreign language are presented: (1) "Research and Design," by Thomas C. Cooper; (2) "Action Research versus Needed Research for the 1980s," by Gilbert A. Jarvis; and (3) "Second Language Acquisition Research: Needs and Priorities," by Stephen D. Krashen. The first paper discusses three research procedures…

Recommendations for research priorities in breast cancer by the Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups Scientific Leadership Council: systemic therapy and therapeutic individualization.

PubMed

Sparano, Joseph A; Hortobagyi, Gabriel N; Gralow, Julie R; Perez, Edith A; Comis, Robert L

2010-02-01

Over 9,000 women with breast cancer are enrolled annually on clinical trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), accounting for about one-third of all patients enrolled on NCI-sponsored trials. Thousands are also enrolled on pharmaceutical-sponsored studies. Although breast cancer mortality rates have recently declined for the first time in part due to systemic therapeutic advances, coordinated efforts will be necessary to maintain this trend. The Coalition of Cancer Cooperative Groups convened the Scientific Leadership Council in breast cancer (BC), an expert panel, to identify priorities for future research and current trials with greatest practice-changing potential. Panelists formed a consensus on research priorities for chemoprevention, development and application of molecular markers for predicting therapeutic benefit and toxicity, intermediate markers predictive of therapeutic effect, pathogenesis-based therapeutic approaches, utilization of adaptive designs requiring fewer patients to achieve objectives, special and minority populations, and effects of BC and treatment on patients and families. Panelists identified 13 ongoing studies as High Priority and identified gaps in the current trial portfolio. We propose priorities for current and future clinical breast cancer research evaluating systemic therapies that may serve to improve the efficiency of clinical trials, identify individuals most likely to derive therapeutic benefit, and prioritize therapeutic strategies.

Health Research and Millennium Development Goals: Identifying the Gap From Public Health Perspective

PubMed Central

El Lawindi, Mona I.; Galal, Yasmine S.; Khairy, Walaa A.

2016-01-01

Assessing the research output within the universities could provide an effective means for tracking the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) progress. This analytical database study was designed to assess the trend of research theses conducted by the Public Health Department (PHD), Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University during the period 1990 to 2014 as related to the: MDGS, Faculty and department research priority plans and to identify the discrepancies between researchers’ priorities versus national and international research priorities. A manual search of the theses was done at the Postgraduate Library using a specially designed checklist to chart adherence of each thesis to: MDGs, Faculty and department research plans (RPs). The theses’ profile showed that the highest research output was for addressing the MDGS followed by the PHD and Faculty RPs. Compliance to MDGs 5 and 6 was obvious, whereas; MDGs 2, 3, and 7 were not represented at all after year 2000. No significant difference was found between PH theses addressing the Faculty RPs and those which were not before and after 2010. A significantly lower percent of PH theses was fulfilling the PHD research priorities compared to those which were not after 2010. This study showed a definite decline in research output tackling the MDGS and PHD research priorities, with a non-significant increase in the production of theses addressing the Faculty RPs. The present study is a practical model for policy makers within the universities to develop and implement a reliable monitoring and evaluation system for assessment of research output. PMID:26652084

Priority setting: what constitutes success? A conceptual framework for successful priority setting.

PubMed

Sibbald, Shannon L; Singer, Peter A; Upshur, Ross; Martin, Douglas K

2009-03-05

The sustainability of healthcare systems worldwide is threatened by a growing demand for services and expensive innovative technologies. Decision makers struggle in this environment to set priorities appropriately, particularly because they lack consensus about which values should guide their decisions. One way to approach this problem is to determine what all relevant stakeholders understand successful priority setting to mean. The goal of this research was to develop a conceptual framework for successful priority setting. Three separate empirical studies were completed using qualitative data collection methods (one-on-one interviews with healthcare decision makers from across Canada; focus groups with representation of patients, caregivers and policy makers; and Delphi study including scholars and decision makers from five countries). This paper synthesizes the findings from three studies into a framework of ten separate but interconnected elements germane to successful priority setting: stakeholder understanding, shifted priorities/reallocation of resources, decision making quality, stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction, positive externalities, stakeholder engagement, use of explicit process, information management, consideration of values and context, and revision or appeals mechanism. The ten elements specify both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of priority setting and relate to both process and outcome components. To our knowledge, this is the first framework that describes successful priority setting. The ten elements identified in this research provide guidance for decision makers and a common language to discuss priority setting success and work toward improving priority setting efforts.

Priority setting: what constitutes success? A conceptual framework for successful priority setting

PubMed Central

Sibbald, Shannon L; Singer, Peter A; Upshur, Ross; Martin, Douglas K

2009-01-01

Background The sustainability of healthcare systems worldwide is threatened by a growing demand for services and expensive innovative technologies. Decision makers struggle in this environment to set priorities appropriately, particularly because they lack consensus about which values should guide their decisions. One way to approach this problem is to determine what all relevant stakeholders understand successful priority setting to mean. The goal of this research was to develop a conceptual framework for successful priority setting. Methods Three separate empirical studies were completed using qualitative data collection methods (one-on-one interviews with healthcare decision makers from across Canada; focus groups with representation of patients, caregivers and policy makers; and Delphi study including scholars and decision makers from five countries). Results This paper synthesizes the findings from three studies into a framework of ten separate but interconnected elements germane to successful priority setting: stakeholder understanding, shifted priorities/reallocation of resources, decision making quality, stakeholder acceptance and satisfaction, positive externalities, stakeholder engagement, use of explicit process, information management, consideration of values and context, and revision or appeals mechanism. Conclusion The ten elements specify both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of priority setting and relate to both process and outcome components. To our knowledge, this is the first framework that describes successful priority setting. The ten elements identified in this research provide guidance for decision makers and a common language to discuss priority setting success and work toward improving priority setting efforts. PMID:19265518

International scientists' priorities for research on pharmaceutical and personal care products in the environment.

PubMed

Rudd, Murray A; Ankley, Gerald T; Boxall, Alistair B A; Brooks, Bryan W

2014-10-01

Pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) are widely discharged into the environment via diverse pathways. The effects of PPCPs in the environment have potentially important human and ecosystem health implications, so credible, salient, and legitimate scientific evidence is needed to inform regulatory and policy responses that address potential risks. A recent "big questions" exercise with participants largely from North America identified 22 important research questions around the risks of PPCP in the environment that would help address the most pressing knowledge gaps over the next decade. To expand that analysis, we developed a survey that was completed by 535 environmental scientists from 57 countries, of whom 49% identified environmental or analytical chemistry as their primary disciplinary background. They ranked the 22 original research questions and submitted 171 additional candidate research questions they felt were also of high priority. Of the original questions, the 3 perceived to be of highest importance related to: 1) the effects of long-term exposure to low concentrations of PPCP mixtures on nontarget organisms, 2) effluent treatment methods that can reduce the effects of PPCPs in the environment while not increasing the toxicity of whole effluents, and 3) the assessment of the environmental risks of metabolites and environmental transformation products of PPCPs. A question regarding the role of cultural perspectives in PPCP risk assessment was ranked as the lowest priority. There were significant differences in research orientation between scientists who completed English and Chinese language versions of the survey. We found that the Chinese respondents were strongly orientated to issues of managing risk profiles, effluent treatment, residue bioavailability, and regional assessment. Among English language respondents, further differences in research orientation were associated with respondents' level of consistency when ranking the survey

Menstrual hygiene management among adolescent schoolgirls in low- and middle-income countries: research priorities

PubMed Central

Phillips-Howard, Penelope A.; Caruso, Bethany; Torondel, Belen; Zulaika, Garazi; Sahin, Murat; Sommer, Marni

2016-01-01

Background A lack of adequate guidance on menstrual management; water, disposal, and private changing facilities; and sanitary hygiene materials in low- and middle-income countries leaves schoolgirls with limited options for healthy personal hygiene during monthly menses. While a plethora of observational studies have described how menstrual hygiene management (MHM) barriers in school impact girls’ dignity, well-being, and engagement in school activities, studies have yet to confirm if inadequate information and facilities for MHM significantly affects quantifiable school and health outcomes influencing girls’ life chances. Evidence on these hard outcomes will take time to accrue; however, a current lack of standardized methods, tools, and research funding is hampering progress and must be addressed. Objectives Compile research priorities for MHM and types of research methods that can be used. Results In this article, we highlight the current knowledge gaps in school-aged girls’ MHM research, and identify opportunities for addressing the dearth of hard evidence limiting the ability of governments, donors, and other agencies to appropriately target resources. We outline a series of research priorities and methodologies that were drawn from an expert panel to address global priorities for MHM in schools for the next 10 years. Conclusions A strong evidence base for different settings, standardized definitions regarding MHM outcomes, improved study designs and methodologies, and the creation of an MHM research consortia to focus attention on this neglected global issue. PMID:27938648

Physical Sciences Research Priorities and Plans in OBPR

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Trinh, Eugene

2002-01-01

This paper presents viewgraphs of physical sciences research priorities and plans at the Office of Biological and Physical Sciences Research (OBPR). The topics include: 1) Sixth Microgravity Fluid Physics and Transport Phenomena Conference; 2) Beneficial Characteristics of the Space Environment; 3) Windows of Opportunity for Research Derived from Microgravity; 4) Physical Sciences Research Program; 5) Fundamental Research: Space-based Results and Ground-based Applications; 6) Nonlinear Oscillations; and 7) Fundamental Research: Applications to Mission-Oriented Research.

How Schools Can Promote Healthy Development for Newly Arrived Immigrant and Refugee Adolescents: Research Priorities

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

McNeely, Clea A.; Morland, Lyn; Doty, S. Benjamin; Meschke, Laurie L.; Awad, Summer; Husain, Altaf; Nashwan, Ayat

2017-01-01

Background: The US education system must find creative and effective ways to foster the healthy development of the approximately 2 million newly arrived immigrant and refugee adolescents, many of whom contend with language barriers, limited prior education, trauma, and discrimination. We identify research priorities for promoting the school…

Research Priorities in Mental Health, Justice, and Safety: A Multidisciplinary Stakeholder Report

PubMed Central

Crocker, Anne G.; Nicholls, Tonia L.; Seto, Michael C.; Roy, Laurence; Leclair, Marichelle C.; Brink, Johann; Simpson, Alexander I. F.; Côté, Gilles

2015-01-01

This paper is based on the report following the National Research Agenda Meeting on Mental Health, Justice, and Safety held in Montreal on November 19, 2014, which convened academics; health, social, and legal professionals; and people with lived experience of mental illness from across Canada. The goal was to identify research priorities addressing relevant knowledge gaps and research strategies that can translate into public policy action and improvements in evidence-based services. Participants identified key challenges: (1) inadequate identification and response to needs by civil mental health services and frontline law enforcement, (2) limited specialized resources in forensic and correctional settings, (3) fragmented care and gaps between systems, (4) limited resources for adequate community reintegration, and (5) poor knowledge transfer strategies as obstacles to evidence-based policies. Knowledge gaps were identified in epidemiology and risk reduction, frontline training and programs, forensic and correctional practices, organizations and institutions, knowledge transfer, and rehabilitation. Finally, participants identified potential sources of support to conduct real time research with regard to data collection and sharing. The findings represent a roadmap for how forensic mental health systems can best proceed to address current challenges through research and practice initiatives, drawing from lived, clinical and research experiences of a multidisciplinary group of experts. PMID:26681928

Emergency planning and management in health care: priority research topics.

PubMed

Boyd, Alan; Chambers, Naomi; French, Simon; Shaw, Duncan; King, Russell; Whitehead, Alison

2014-06-01

Many major incidents have significant impacts on people's health, placing additional demands on health-care organisations. The main aim of this paper is to suggest a prioritised agenda for organisational and management research on emergency planning and management relevant to U.K. health care, based on a scoping study. A secondary aim is to enhance knowledge and understanding of health-care emergency planning among the wider research community, by highlighting key issues and perspectives on the subject and presenting a conceptual model. The study findings have much in common with those of previous U.S.-focused scoping reviews, and with a recent U.K.-based review, confirming the relative paucity of U.K.-based research. No individual research topic scored highly on all of the key measures identified, with communities and organisations appearing to differ about which topics are the most important. Four broad research priorities are suggested: the affected public; inter- and intra-organisational collaboration; preparing responders and their organisations; and prioritisation and decision making.

Towards deep inclusion for equity-oriented health research priority-setting: A working model.

PubMed

Pratt, Bridget; Merritt, Maria; Hyder, Adnan A

2016-02-01

Growing consensus that health research funders should align their investments with national research priorities presupposes that such national priorities exist and are just. Arguably, justice requires national health research priority-setting to promote health equity. Such a position is consistent with recommendations made by the World Health Organization and at global ministerial summits that health research should serve to reduce health inequalities between and within countries. Thus far, no specific requirements for equity-oriented research priority-setting have been described to guide policymakers. As a step towards the explication and defence of such requirements, we propose that deep inclusion is a key procedural component of equity-oriented research priority-setting. We offer a model of deep inclusion that was developed by applying concepts from work on deliberative democracy and development ethics. This model consists of three dimensions--breadth, qualitative equality, and high-quality non-elite participation. Deep inclusion is captured not only by who is invited to join a decision-making process but also by how they are involved and by when non-elite stakeholders are involved. To clarify and illustrate the proposed dimensions, we use the sustained example of health systems research. We conclude by reviewing practical challenges to achieving deep inclusion. Despite the existence of barriers to implementation, our model can help policymakers and other stakeholders design more inclusive national health research priority-setting processes and assess these processes' depth of inclusion. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

76 FR 17396 - Proposed Priorities: Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-29

...-science conference on its designated priority research area in the fourth year of the project period, and... Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative... and Rehabilitative Services proposes two priorities for the Disability and Rehabilitation Research...

National VET Research Priorities: 2010 and beyond. Discussion Paper

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER), 2009

2009-01-01

National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) is undertaking a consultation process to determine the next set of National Research Priorities which will guide research activities in the post-compulsory education and training arena, particularly in relation to vocational education and training. This discussion paper, and the…

Identifying acne treatment uncertainties via a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership

PubMed Central

Layton, Alison; Eady, E Anne; Peat, Maggie; Whitehouse, Heather; Levell, Nick; Ridd, Matthew; Cowdell, Fiona; Patel, Mahenda; Andrews, Stephen; Oxnard, Christine; Fenton, Mark; Firkins, Lester

2015-01-01

Objectives The Acne Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was set up to identify and rank treatment uncertainties by bringing together people with acne, and professionals providing care within and beyond the National Health Service (NHS). Setting The UK with international participation. Participants Teenagers and adults with acne, parents, partners, nurses, clinicians, pharmacists, private practitioners. Methods Treatment uncertainties were collected via separate online harvesting surveys, embedded within the PSP website, for patients and professionals. A wide variety of approaches were used to promote the surveys to stakeholder groups with a particular emphasis on teenagers and young adults. Survey submissions were collated using keywords and verified as uncertainties by appraising existing evidence. The 30 most popular themes were ranked via weighted scores from an online vote. At a priority setting workshop, patients and professionals discussed the 18 highest-scoring questions from the vote, and reached consensus on the top 10. Results In the harvesting survey, 2310 people, including 652 professionals and 1456 patients (58% aged 24 y or younger), made submissions containing at least one research question. After checking for relevance and rephrasing, a total of 6255 questions were collated into themes. Valid votes ranking the 30 most common themes were obtained from 2807 participants. The top 10 uncertainties prioritised at the workshop were largely focused on management strategies, optimum use of common prescription medications and the role of non-drug based interventions. More female than male patients took part in the harvesting surveys and vote. A wider range of uncertainties were provided by patients compared to professionals. Conclusions Engaging teenagers and young adults in priority setting is achievable using a variety of promotional methods. The top 10 uncertainties reveal an extensive knowledge gap about widely used interventions and the relative merits

Rapid research and implementation priority setting for wound care uncertainties.

PubMed

Gray, Trish A; Dumville, Jo C; Christie, Janice; Cullum, Nicky A

2017-01-01

podiatrists and six managers. Participants had been qualified for a mean of 20.7 years with a mean of 16.8 years of wound care experience. One hundred and thirty-nine uncertainties were submitted electronically and a further 20 were identified on the day of the workshop following lively, interactive group discussions. Twenty-five uncertainties from the total of 159 generated made it to the final prioritised list. These included six of the 20 new uncertainties. The uncertainties varied in focus, but could be broadly categorised into three themes: service delivery and organisation, patient centred care and treatment options. Specialist nurses were more likely to vote for service delivery and organisation topics, podiatrists for patient centred topics, district nurses for treatment options and operational leads for a broad range. This collaborative priority setting project is the first to engage front-line clinicians in prioritising research and implementation topics in wound care. We have shown that it is feasible to conduct topic prioritisation in a short time frame. This project has demonstrated that with careful planning and rigor, important questions that are raised in the course of clinicians' daily decision making can be translated into meaningful research and implementation initiatives that could make a difference to service delivery and patient care.

Rapid research and implementation priority setting for wound care uncertainties

PubMed Central

Dumville, Jo C.; Christie, Janice; Cullum, Nicky A.

2017-01-01

, 10 district nurses, seven podiatrists and six managers. Participants had been qualified for a mean of 20.7 years with a mean of 16.8 years of wound care experience. One hundred and thirty-nine uncertainties were submitted electronically and a further 20 were identified on the day of the workshop following lively, interactive group discussions. Twenty-five uncertainties from the total of 159 generated made it to the final prioritised list. These included six of the 20 new uncertainties. The uncertainties varied in focus, but could be broadly categorised into three themes: service delivery and organisation, patient centred care and treatment options. Specialist nurses were more likely to vote for service delivery and organisation topics, podiatrists for patient centred topics, district nurses for treatment options and operational leads for a broad range. Conclusions This collaborative priority setting project is the first to engage front-line clinicians in prioritising research and implementation topics in wound care. We have shown that it is feasible to conduct topic prioritisation in a short time frame. This project has demonstrated that with careful planning and rigor, important questions that are raised in the course of clinicians’ daily decision making can be translated into meaningful research and implementation initiatives that could make a difference to service delivery and patient care. PMID:29206884

Citizens’ juries in planning research priorities: process, engagement and outcome

PubMed Central

Gooberman‐Hill, Rachael; Horwood, Jeremy; Calnan, Michael

2008-01-01

Abstract Background  Involving members of the public in setting priorities for health research in becoming increasingly common practice. One method used in public involvement exercises is the citizens' jury. Objective  This article examines some challenges and benefits of citizens' juries, including issues relating to process, public engagement and outcome. Design  In Bristol, UK, a citizens' jury was held with the aim of identifying local priorities for research into health and social care. This jury is used as an example through which key issues in public involvement and jury processes are explored. Setting and Participants  The Bristol Citizens' Jury comprised 20 members of the public (`jurors'), an oversight panel and a steering group. The jurors met at 11 consecutive sessions during 2006 over a period of 16 weeks, which culminated in a written report. All the sessions were audio‐recorded, five sessions were observed and video‐recorded, and 16 jurors completed written feedback forms at the end of the jury process. Findings and conclusion  In this article we discuss degree and timing of public involvement in the process of health research; the role of context; representation of communities; processes of deliberation and knowledge production; and how constraints of time and cost may affect public involvement. It was clear that jurors who took part in the Bristol Citizens' Jury were engaged and committed. This engagement may be related to jurors' belief in their ability to shape future research alongside concern about the relevance of the issues under discussion. Opposing emotions of tension and harmony are a crucial part of the deliberation process. PMID:18816323

Reconciling research and community priorities in participatory trials: application to Padres Informados/Jovenes Preparados.

PubMed

Allen, Michele L; Garcia-Huidobro, Diego; Bastian, Tiana; Hurtado, G Ali; Linares, Roxana; Svetaz, María Veronica

2017-06-01

Participatory research (PR) trials aim to achieve the dual, and at times competing, demands of producing an intervention and research process that address community perspectives and priorities, while establishing intervention effectiveness. To identify research and community priorities that must be reconciled in the areas of collaborative processes, study design and aim and study implementation quality in order to successfully conduct a participatory trial. We describe how this reconciliation was approached in the smoking prevention participatory trial Padres Informados/Jovenes Preparados (Informed Parents/Prepared Youth) and evaluate the success of our reconciled priorities. Data sources to evaluate success of the reconciliations included a survey of all partners regarding collaborative group processes, intervention participant recruitment and attendance and surveys of enrolled study participants assessing intervention outcomes. While we successfully achieved our reconciled collaborative processes and implementation quality goals, we did not achieve our reconciled goals in study aim and design. Due in part to the randomized wait-list control group design chosen in the reconciliation process, we were not able to demonstrate overall efficacy of the intervention or offer timely services to families in need of support. Achieving the goals of participatory trials is challenging but may yield community and research benefits. Innovative research designs are needed to better support the complex goals of participatory trials. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

International consensus on military research priorities and gaps - Survey results from the 4th International Congress on Soldiers' Physical Performance.

PubMed

Lovalekar, Mita; Sharp, Marilyn A; Billing, Daniel C; Drain, Jace R; Nindl, Bradley C; Zambraski, Edward J

2018-06-06

The objectives of this study were to identify perceived priorities related to military personnel's health and physical performance, among attendees at the 4th International Congress on Soldiers' Physical Performance (ICSPP), and to determine if perceived priorities had changed between the 3rd ICSPP survey held in 2014 and the 4th ICSPP survey held in 2017. Electronic survey. Respondents were asked to grade priority areas on a Likert scale, and average ratings were used to rank priority areas. Responses to free text questions were analyzed qualitatively. Responses to the 4th ICSPP survey were described and compared to responses to the 3rd ICSPP survey. The 4th ICSPP survey respondents were a diverse group (40.6% military, 58.9% civilian). The two most important priority areas identified were physical demands in operational environments (mean score=4.41/5) and measuring physical performance/fitness (4.38/5), which were also the top two areas in the 3rd ICSPP survey. There was remarkable overlap in the rankings of priority areas between the two surveys. Sleep and nutrition were emerging priority areas and were perceived as relatively more important in the 4th ICSPP survey compared to the 3rd ICSPP survey. The greatest perceived emerging threat was resilience/psychological fitness of recruits (4.16/5). Physiological status monitoring (2.79/4) was identified as the most important technology. Despite the diverse backgrounds of the respondents, there was a clear continuing consensus about perceived important priority areas influencing military personnel's health and physical performance. Soldier resiliency and assessment of physiological status were research topics identified as top priorities. Copyright © 2018 Sports Medicine Australia. All rights reserved.

Hydrogel research in Germany: the priority programme, Intelligent Hydrogels

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Wallmersperger, Thomas; Sadowski, Gabriele

2009-03-01

The priority programme "Intelligent Hydrogels" was established by the German Research Foundation (DFG) in 2006 in order to strengthen the hydrogel-related research in Germany. The programme is being coordinated by Gabriele Sadowski, Technische Universität Dortmund. The aim of this priority programme is to develop new methods for the synthesis and characterization of smart hydrogels and to develop new modelling strategies in order to a) prepare the hydrogels for special applications and/or b) to develop and extend their capabilities for any desired use. In this programme, 73 scientists (36 professors and 37 scientific assistants/PhD students) from all over Germany are involved, working in 23 projects.

Cyber S&T Priority Steering Council Research Roadmap

DTIC Science & Technology

2011-11-08

Priority Steering Council Research Roadmap for the National Defense Industrial Association Disruptive Technologies Conference 8 November 2011...AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Presented at the NDIA Disruptive Technologies Conference

Environmental reporting and accounting in Australia: progress, prospects and research priorities.

PubMed

van Dijk, Albert; Mount, Richard; Gibbons, Philip; Vardon, Michael; Canadell, Pep

2014-03-01

Despite strong demand for information to support the sustainable use of Australia's natural resources and conserve environmental values and despite considerable effort and investment, nation-wide environmental data collection and analysis remains a substantially unmet challenge. We review progress in producing national environmental reports and accounts, identify challenges and opportunities, and analyse the potential role of research in addressing these. Australia's low and concentrated population density and the short history since European settlement contribute to the lack of environmental data. There are additional factors: highly diverse data requirements and standards, disagreement on information priorities, poorly measurable management objectives, lack of coordination, over-reliance on researchers and businesses for data collection, lack of business engagement, and short-term, project-based activities. New opportunities have arisen to overcome some of these challenges: enhanced monitoring networks, standardisation, data management and modelling, greater commitment to share and integrate data, community monitoring, increasing acceptance of environmental and sustainability indicators, and progress in environmental accounting practices. Successes in generating climate, water and greenhouse gas information appear to be attributable to an unambiguous data requirement, considerable investment, and legislative instruments that enhance data sharing and create a clearly defined role for operational agencies. Based on the analysis presented, we suggest six priorities for research: (1) common definitions and standards for information that address management objectives, (2) ecological measures that are scalable from local to national level, (3) promotion of long-term data collection and reporting by researchers, (4) efficient satellite and sensor network technologies and data analysis methods, (5) environmental modelling approaches that can reconcile multiple data

78 FR 27036 - Final Priority. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Traumatic Brain...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-09

... individuals with disabilities in conducting TBIMS research. Types of Priorities When inviting applications for... Rehabilitation Research--Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Centers Collaborative Research Project AGENCY... Services announces a priority for the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program...

ESA's Earth observation priority research objectives and satellite instrument requirements

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Reynolds, M. L.

2018-04-01

Since 1996 the European Space Agency has been pursuing an Earth Observation strategy based on a resolution endorsed by European Minister at a meeting in Toulouse. This resolution recognised a broad distinction between purely research objectives, on the one hand, and purely application objectives on the other. However, this is not to be understood as an absolute separation, but rather as an identification of the major driving emphasis for the definition of mission requirement. Indeed, application satellites can provide a wealth of data for research objectives and scientific earth observation programmes can equally provide an important source of data to develop and demonstrate new applications. It is sufficient to look at the data utilisation of Meteosat and ERS to find very many examples of this. This paper identifies the priority research objectives defined for scientific Earth Explorer missions and the resulting instrument needs. It then outlines the requirements for optical instruments.

Research priority setting in Barrett's oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

PubMed

Britton, James; Gadeke, Lisa; Lovat, Laurence; Hamdy, Shaheen; Hawkey, Chris; McLaughlin, John; Ang, Yeng

2017-11-01

The incidence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and Barrett's oesophagus is increasing. Barrett's oesophagus is the main precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma, which has a poor prognosis. In view of the vast potential burden of these diseases on patients and health-care resources, there is a real need to define and focus research efforts. This priority setting exercise aimed to produce a list of the top ten uncertainties in the field that reflect the priorities of patients and health-care providers. We adopted the robust and transparent methodologies previously outlined by the James Lind Alliance. This qualitative approach firstly involves an ideas gathering survey that, once distilled, generates a longlist of research uncertainties. These uncertainties are then prioritised via an interim ranking survey and a final workshop to achieve consensus agreement. The initial 629 uncertainties, generated from a survey of 170 individual respondents (47% professional, 53% non-professional) and one workshop, were narrowed down to the final top ten uncertainties of priority for future research. These priorities covered a range of issues, including a need for improved patient risk stratification, alternative diagnostic and surveillance tests, efficacy of a dedicated service for Barrett's oesophagus, cost-effectiveness and appropriateness of current surveillance, advances in development of non-drug treatments for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, safety of long-term drug treatment, and questions regarding the durability and role of different endoscopic therapies for dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus. This is the first patient-centred assessment of priorities for researchers in this chronic disease setting. We hope that recognition and dissemination of these results will shape the future direction of research and translate into meaningful gains for patients. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Research priorities for shoulder surgery: results of the 2015 James Lind Alliance patient and clinician priority setting partnership.

PubMed

Rangan, Amar; Upadhaya, Sheela; Regan, Sandra; Toye, Francine; Rees, Jonathan L

2016-04-11

To run a UK based James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership for 'Surgery for Common Shoulder Problems'. This was a nationally funded and conducted process. It was organised from a musculoskeletal research centre and Biomedical Research Unit in Oxford. UK shoulder patients, carers and clinicians, involved in treating patients with shoulder pain and shoulder problems that might require surgery. These were national electronic and paper surveys capturing treatment uncertainties that are important to shoulder patients, carers and clinicians. The outcomes relevant to this study were the survey results and rankings. The process took 18 months to complete, with 371 participants contributing 404 in scope questions. The James Lind process then produced a final 10 research priorities and uncertainties that relate to the scope of 'Surgery for Common Shoulder Problems'. The final top 10 UK research priorities have been produced and are now being disseminated to partner organisations and funders to guide funding of shoulder research for the next 5-10 years on topics that are important to patients, their carers and clinicians. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

Sickle cell disease in Africa: burden and research priorities

PubMed Central

Makani, J.; Williams, T. N.; Marsh, K.

2017-01-01

Sickle cell disease (SCD) has recently been recognised as a problem of major public-health significance by the World Health Organization. Despite the fact that >70% of sufferers live in Africa, expenditure on the related care and research in the continent is negligible, and most advances in the understanding and management of this condition have been based on research conducted in the North. In order to target limited resources, African countries need to focus research and interventions on areas that will lead to the maximum impact. This review details the epidemiological and clinical background of SCD, with an emphasis on Africa, before identifying the research priorities that will provide the necessary evidence base for improving the management of African patients. Malaria, bacterial and viral infections and cerebrovascular accidents are areas in which further research may lead to a significant improvement in SCD-related morbidity and mortality. As patients with high concentrations of foetal haemoglobin (HbF) appear to be protected from all but mild SCD, the various factors and pharmacological agents that might increase HbF levels need to be assessed in Africa, as options for interventions that would improve quality of life and reduce mortality. PMID:17244405

Prevention and self-management interventions are top priorities for osteoarthritis systematic reviews.

PubMed

Jaramillo, Alejandra; Welch, Vivian A; Ueffing, Erin; Gruen, Russell L; Bragge, Peter; Lyddiatt, Anne; Tugwell, Peter

2013-05-01

To identify high-priority research questions for osteoarthritis systematic reviews with consideration of health equity and the social determinants of health (SDH). We consulted with experts and conducted a literature search to identify a priority-setting method that could be adapted to address the health equity and SDH. We selected the Global Evidence Mapping priority-setting method, and through consultations and consensus, we adapted the method to meet our objectives. This involves developing an evidence map of the existing systematic reviews on osteoarthritis; conducting one face-to-face workshop with patients and another one with clinicians, researchers, and patients; and conducting an online survey of patients to rank the top 10 research questions. We piloted the adapted method with the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group to set research priorities for osteoarthritis. Our focus was on systematic reviews: we identified 34 high-priority research questions for osteoarthritis systematic reviews. Prevention and self-management interventions, mainly diet and exercise, are top priorities for osteoarthritis systematic reviews. Evaluation against our predefined objectives showed that this method did prioritize SDH (50% of the research questions considered SDH). There were marked gaps: no high-priority topics were identified for access to care until patients had advanced disease-lifestyle changes once the disease was diagnosed. This method was felt feasible if conducted annually. We confirmed the utility of an adapted priority-setting method that is feasible and considers SDH. Further testing of this method is needed to assess whether considerations of health equity are prioritized and involve disadvantaged groups of the population. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Identifying priorities for quality improvement at an emergency Department in Ghana.

PubMed

DeWulf, Annelies; Otchi, Elom H; Soghoian, Sari

2017-08-30

Healthcare quality improvement (QI) is a global priority, and understanding the perspectives of frontline healthcare workers can help guide sustainable and meaningful change. We report a qualitative investigation of emergency department (ED) staff priorities for QI at a tertiary care hospital in Ghana. The aims of the study were to educate staff about the World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of quality in healthcare, and to identify an initial focus for building a departmental QI program. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ED staff using open-ended questions to probe their understanding and valuation of the six dimensions of quality defined by the WHO. Participants were then asked to rank the dimensions in order of importance for QI. Qualitative responses were thematically analyzed, and ordinal rank-order was determined for quantitative data regarding QI priorities. Twenty (20) members of staff of different cadres participated, including ED physicians, nurses, orderlies, a security officer, and an accountant. A majority of participants (61%) ranked access to emergency healthcare as high priority for QI. Two recurrent themes - financial accessibility and hospital bed availability - accounted for the majority of discussions, each linked to all the dimensions of healthcare quality. ED staff related all of the WHO quality dimensions to their work, and prioritized access to emergency care as the most important area for improvement. Participants expressed a high degree of motivation to improve healthcare quality, and the study helped with the development of a departmental QI program focused on the broad topic of access to ED services.

What should we teach the teachers? Identifying the learning priorities of clinical supervisors.

PubMed

Bearman, Margaret; Tai, Joanna; Kent, Fiona; Edouard, Vicki; Nestel, Debra; Molloy, Elizabeth

2018-03-01

Clinicians who teach are essential for the health workforce but require faculty development to improve their educational skills. Curricula for faculty development programs are often based on expert frameworks without consideration of the learning priorities as defined by clinical supervisors themselves. We sought to inform these curricula by highlighting clinical supervisors own requirements through answering the research question: what do clinical supervisors identify as relative strengths and areas for improvement in their teaching practice? This mixed methods study employed a modified version of the Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (mMCTQ) which included free-text reflections. Descriptive statistics were calculated and content analysis was conducted on textual comments. 481 (49%) of 978 clinical supervisors submitted their mMCTQs and associated reflections for the research study. Clinical supervisors self-identified relatively strong capability with interpersonal skills or attributes and indicated least capability with assisting learners to explore strengths, weaknesses and learning goals. The qualitative category 'establishing relationships' was the most reported strength with 224 responses. The qualitative category 'feedback' was the most reported area for improvement, with 151 responses. Key areas for curricular focus include: improving feedback practices; stimulating reflective and agentic learning; and managing the logistics of a clinical education environment. Clinical supervisors' self-identified needs provide a foundation for designing engaging and relevant faculty development programs.

Research and management priorities for Hawaiian forest birds

USGS Publications Warehouse

Paxton, Eben H.; Laut, Megan; Vetter, John P.; Kendall, Steve J.

2018-01-01

Hawai‘i's forest birds face a number of conservation challenges that, if unaddressed, will likely lead to the extinction of multiple species in the coming decades. Threats include habitat loss, invasive plants, non-native predators, and introduced diseases. Climate change is predicted to increase the geographic extent and intensity of these threats, adding urgency to implementation of tractable conservation strategies. We present a set of actionable research and management approaches, identified by conservation practitioners in Hawai'i, that will be critical for the conservation of Hawaiian forest birds in the coming years. We also summarize recent progress on these conservation priorities. The threats facing Hawai‘i's forest birds are not unique to Hawai‘i, and successful conservation strategies developed in Hawai‘i can serve as a model for other imperiled communities around the world, especially on islands.

Global priorities for research and the relative importance of different research outcomes: an international Delphi survey of malaria research experts.

PubMed

Mulligan, Jo-Ann; Conteh, Lesong

2016-12-06

As global research investment increases, attention inevitably turns to assessing and measuring the outcomes and impact from research programmes. Research can have many different outcomes such as producing advances in scientific knowledge, building research capacity and, ultimately, health and broader societal benefits. The aim of this study was to test the use of a Delphi methodology as a way of gathering views from malaria research experts on research priorities and eliciting relative valuations of the different types of health research impact. An international Delphi survey of 60 malaria research experts was used to understand views on research outcomes and priorities within malaria and across global health more widely. The study demonstrated the application of the Delphi technique to eliciting views on malaria specific research priorities, wider global health research priorities and the values assigned to different types of research impact. In terms of the most important past research successes, the development of new anti-malarial drugs and insecticide-treated bed nets were rated as the most important. When asked about research priorities for future funding, respondents ranked tackling emerging drug and insecticide resistance the highest. With respect to research impact, the panel valued research that focuses on health and health sector benefits and informing policy and product development. Contributions to scientific knowledge, although highly valued, came lower down the ranking, suggesting that efforts to move research discoveries to health products and services are valued more highly than pure advances in scientific knowledge. Although the Delphi technique has been used to elicit views on research questions in global health this was the first time it has been used to assess how a group of research experts value or rank different types of research impact. The results suggest it is feasible to inject the views of a key stakeholder group into the research

76 FR 37341 - Final Priority; Rehabilitation Research and Training Center-Interventions To Promote Community...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-27

... research, demonstration projects, training, and related activities, to develop methods, procedures, and... DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [CFDA Number: 84.133B-1] Final Priority; Rehabilitation Research and... priority for a Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) on Interventions to Promote Community...

Traditional Chinese medicine research in the post-genomic era: good practice, priorities, challenges and opportunities.

PubMed

Uzuner, Halil; Bauer, Rudolf; Fan, Tai-Ping; Guo, De-An; Dias, Alberto; El-Nezami, Hani; Efferth, Thomas; Williamson, Elizabeth M; Heinrich, Michael; Robinson, Nicola; Hylands, Peter J; Hendry, Bruce M; Cheng, Yung-Chi; Xu, Qihe

2012-04-10

to integrative medicine, concerned on the impact of regulation of TCM practitioners and emphasised intersectoral collaborations in funding TCM research, especially clinical trials. The GP-TCM consortium made great efforts to address some fundamental issues in TCM research, including developing guidelines, as well as identifying priorities, challenges and opportunities. These consortium guidelines and consensus will need dissemination, validation and further development through continued interregional, interdisciplinary and intersectoral collaborations. To promote this, a new consortium, known as the GP-TCM Research Association, is being established to succeed the 3-year fixed term FP7 GP-TCM consortium and will be officially launched at the Final GP-TCM Congress in Leiden, the Netherlands, in April 2012. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Fundamental Problems of Lunar Research, Technical Solutions, and Priority Lunar Regions for Research

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ivanov, M. A.; Basilevsky, A. T.; Bricheva, S. S.; Guseva, E. N.; Demidov, N. E.; Zakharova, M.; Krasil'nikov, S. S.

2017-11-01

In this article, we discuss four fundamental scientific problems of lunar research: (1) lunar chronology, (2) the internal structure of the Moon, (3) the lunar polar regions, and (4) lunar volcanism. After formulating the scientific problems and their components, we proceed to outlining a list of technical solutions and priority lunar regions for research. Solving the listed problems requires investigations on the lunar surface using lunar rovers, which can deliver a set of analytical equipment to places where geological conditions are known from a detailed analysis of orbital information. The most critical research methods, which can answer some of the key questions, are analysis of local geological conditions from panoramic photographs, determination of the chemical, isotopic, and mineral composition of the soil, and deep seismic sounding. A preliminary list is given of lunar regions with high scientific priority.

Priority regions for research on dryland cereals and legumes

PubMed Central

Hyman, Glenn; Barona, Elizabeth; Biradar, Chandrashekhar; Guevara, Edward; Dixon, John; Beebe, Steve; Castano, Silvia Elena; Alabi, Tunrayo; Gumma, Murali Krishna; Sivasankar, Shoba; Rivera, Ovidio; Espinosa, Herlin; Cardona, Jorge

2016-01-01

Dryland cereals and legumes  are important crops in farming systems across the world.  Yet they are frequently neglected among the priorities for international agricultural research and development, often due to lack of information on their magnitude and extent. Given what we know about the global distribution of dryland cereals and legumes, what regions should be high priority for research and development to improve livelihoods and food security? This research evaluated the geographic dimensions of these crops and the farming systems where they are found worldwide. The study employed geographic information science and data to assess the key farming systems and regions for these crops. Dryland cereal and legume crops should be given high priority in 18 farming systems worldwide, where their cultivated area comprises more than 160 million ha. These regions include the dryer areas of South Asia, West and East Africa, the Middle East and North Africa, Central America and other parts of Asia. These regions are prone to drought and heat stress, have limiting soil constraints, make up half of the global population and account for 60 percent of the global poor and malnourished. The dryland cereal and legume crops and farming systems merit more research and development attention to improve productivity and address development problems. This project developed an open access dataset and information resource that provides the basis for future analysis of the geographic dimensions of dryland cereals and legumes. PMID:27303632

The National Occupational Research Agenda: a model of broad stakeholder input into priority setting.

PubMed Central

Rosenstock, L; Olenec, C; Wagner, G R

1998-01-01

OBJECTIVES: No single organization has the resources necessary to conduct occupational safety and health research to adequately serve the needs of workers in the United States. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) undertook the task of setting research priorities in response to a broadly perceived need to systematically address those topics most pressing and most likely to yield gains to workers and to the nation. METHODS: NIOSH and its public and private partners used a consensus-building process to set priorities for the next decade for occupational safety and health research--the National Occupational Research Agenda. RESULTS: The process resulted in the identification of 21 research priorities grouped into 3 categories: disease and injury, work environment and workforce, and research tools and approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Although the field of occupational safety and health is often contentious and adversarial, these research priorities reflect a remarkable degree of concurrence among a broad range of stakeholders who provided input into a clearly defined and open process. PMID:9518963

Healthcare and Research Priorities of Adolescents and Young Adults with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Mixed-methods Study.

PubMed

Tunnicliffe, David J; Singh-Grewal, Davinder; Craig, Jonathan C; Howell, Martin; Tugwell, Peter; Mackie, Fiona; Lin, Ming-Wei; O'Neill, Sean G; Ralph, Angelique F; Tong, Allison

2017-04-01

Managing juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is particularly challenging. The disease may be severe, adolescent patients have complex medical and psychosocial needs, and patients must navigate the transition to adult services. To inform patient-centered care, we aimed to identify the healthcare and research priorities of young patients with SLE and describe the reasons underpinning their priorities. Face-to-face, semistructured interviews and focus groups were conducted with patients with SLE, aged from 14 to 26 years, from 5 centers in Australia. For each of the 5 allocation exercises, participants allocated 10 votes to (1) research topics; research questions on (2) medical management, (3) prevention and diagnosis, (4) lifestyle and psychosocial; and (5) healthcare specialties, and discussed the reasons for their choices. Descriptive statistics were calculated for votes and qualitative data were analyzed thematically. The 26 participants prioritized research that alleviated the psychological burden of SLE. They allocated their votes toward medical and mental health specialties in the management of SLE, while fewer votes were given to physiotherapy/occupational therapy and dietetics. The following 7 themes underpinned the participants' priorities: improving service shortfalls, strengthening well-being, ensuring cost efficiency, minimizing family/community burden, severity of comorbidity or complications, reducing lifestyle disruption, and fulfilling future goals. Young patients with SLE value comprehensive care with greater coordination among specialties. They prioritized research focused on alleviating poor psychological outcomes. The healthcare and research agenda for patients with SLE should include everyone involved, to ensure that the agenda aligns with patient priorities, needs, and values.

Public health research priorities in Europe seen by non-governmental organizations.

PubMed

Gulis, Gabriel; Garrido-Herrero, Lara; Katreniakova, Zuzana; Harvey, Gabrielle; McCarthy, Mark

2008-12-01

Public health research is concerned with population health, determinants of health, health systems research, health promotion, environmental health, health protection, disease prevention and research in other fields of public health. During the last decades, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are more often entering the field of public health research. This paper presents results of work within SPHERE (Strengthening Public Health Research in Europe), a European Commission funded study aimed to gather information and produce knowledge on the state of public health research in Europe. A questionnaire survey was developed and conducted among NGOs enrolled in a database held by the European Public Health Alliance (EPHA). There were 80 replies, and the response rate for NGOs that were members of EPHA was 53%. There were no significant statistical differences in the responses when analysed for three European groups ['old' member states (EU 15), accession members states in 2004 (EU 10) and EU-associated countries]. The NGOs reported a relatively large international experience, expressed by participation in international public health research, and more often practice work. The main research priorities reported were general public health, environmental health, ADHD, obesity, nutrition, tobacco control. NGOs showed low correlation between their work field and their proposed public health research priorities. There are growing numbers of NGOs in Europe concerned with public health. This survey indicates their interest also in public health research priorities.

A Delphi study on research priorities for trauma nursing.

PubMed

Bayley, E W; Richmond, T; Noroian, E L; Allen, L R

1994-05-01

To identify and prioritize research questions of importance to trauma patient care and of interest to trauma nurses. A three-round Delphi technique was used to solicit, identify, and prioritize problems for trauma nursing research. In round 1, experienced trauma nurses (N = 208) generated 513 problems, which were analyzed, categorized, and collapsed into 111 items for subsequent rounds. Round 2 participants rated each research question on a 1 to 7 scale on two criteria: impact on patient welfare and value for practicing nurses. Group median scores provided by 166 round 2 respondents and respondents' individual round 2 scores were indicated on the round 3 questionnaire. Subjects rated the questions again on the same criteria and indicated whether nurses, independently or in collaboration with other health professionals, should assume responsibility for that research. Median and mean scores and rank order were determined for each item. Respondents who completed all three rounds (n = 137) had a mean of 8.3 years of trauma experience. Nine research questions ranked within the top 20 on both criteria. The two research questions that ranked highest on both criteria were: What are the most effective nursing interventions in the prevention of pulmonary and circulatory complications in trauma patients? and What are the most effective methods for preventing aspiration in trauma patients during the postoperative phase? The third-ranked question regarding patient welfare was: What psychological and lifestyle changes result from traumatic injury? Regarding value for practicing nurses, What are the most effective educational methods to prepare and maintain proficiency in trauma care providers? ranked third. These research priorities provide impetus and direction for nursing and collaborative investigation in trauma care.

Rural Communities and Rural Social Issues: Priorities for Research.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Black, Alan; Duff, John; Saggers, Sherry; Baines, Patricia

This report recommends priorities for research into rural communities and rural social issues in Australia, based on an extensive literature review, surveys of policymaking agencies and researchers, and discussion at a national workshop in May 1999. Chapters 1-2 outline the study's background, purpose, and methodology; discuss issues in the…

Setting high-impact clinical research priorities for the Society for Vascular Surgery.

PubMed

Kraiss, Larry W; Conte, Michael S; Geary, Randolph L; Kibbe, Melina; Ozaki, C Keith

2013-02-01

With the overall goal of enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of vascular care, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) recently completed a process by which it identified its top clinical research priorities to address critical gaps in knowledge guiding practitioners in prevention and treatment of vascular disease. After a survey of the SVS membership, a panel of SVS committee members and opinion leaders considered 53 distinct research questions through a structured process that resulted in identification of nine clinical issues that were felt to merit immediate attention by vascular investigators and external funding agencies. These are, in order of priority: (1) define optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis, (2) compare the effectiveness of medical vs invasive treatment (open or endovascular) of vasculogenic claudication, (3) compare effectiveness of open vs endovascular infrainguinal revascularization as initial treatment of critical limb ischemia, (4) develop and compare the effectiveness of clinical strategies to reduce cardiovascular and other perioperative complications (eg, wound) after vascular intervention, (5) compare the effectiveness of strategies to enhance arteriovenous fistula maturation and durability, (6) develop best practices for management of chronic venous ulcer, (7) define optimal adjunctive medical therapy to enhance the success of lower extremity revascularization, (8) identify and evaluate medical therapy to prevent abdominal aortic aneurysm growth, and (9) evaluate ultrasound vs computed tomographic angiography surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair. Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Research Priorities for Article 14—Demand Reduction Measures Concerning Tobacco Dependence and Cessation

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Introduction: Tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) interventions are often seen as expensive with little impact on the prevalence of tobacco use. However, activities that promote the cessation of tobacco use and support abstinence have an important role in any comprehensive tobacco control program and as such are recognized within Article 14 (A14) of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Objectives: To review current evidence for TDT and recommend research priorities that will contribute to more people being helped to stop tobacco use. Methods: We used the recommendations within the A14 guidelines to guide a review of current evidence and best practice for promotion of tobacco cessation and TDT, identify gaps, and propose research priorities. Results: We identified nine areas for future research (a) understanding current tobacco use and the effect of policy on behavior, (b) promoting cessation of tobacco use, (c) implementation of TDT guidelines, (d) increasing training capacity, (e) enhancing population-based TDT interventions, (f) treatment for different types of tobacco use, (g) supply of low-cost pharmaceutical devices/ products, (h) investigation use of nonpharmaceutical devices/ products, and (i) refinement of current TDTs. Specific research topics are suggested within each of these areas and recognize the differences needed between high- and low-/middle-income countries. Conclusions: Research should be prioritized toward examining interventions that (a) promote cessation of tobacco use, (b) assist health care workers provide better help to smokers (e.g., through implementation of guidelines and training), (c) enhance population-based TDT interventions, and (d) assist people to cease the use of other tobacco products. PMID:23139406

Patient-centered priorities for improving medication management and adherence.

PubMed

McMullen, Carmit K; Safford, Monika M; Bosworth, Hayden B; Phansalkar, Shobha; Leong, Amye; Fagan, Maureen B; Trontell, Anne; Rumptz, Maureen; Vandermeer, Meredith L; Brinkman, William B; Burkholder, Rebecca; Frank, Lori; Hommel, Kevin; Mathews, Robin; Hornbrook, Mark C; Seid, Michael; Fordis, Michael; Lambert, Bruce; McElwee, Newell; Singh, Jasvinder A

2015-01-01

The Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics convened a workshop to examine the scientific evidence on medication adherence interventions from the patient-centered perspective and to explore the potential of patient-centered medication management to improve chronic disease treatment. Patients, providers, researchers, and other stakeholders (N = 28) identified and prioritized ideas for future research and practice. We analyzed stakeholder voting on priorities and reviewed themes in workshop discussions. Ten priority areas emerged. Three areas were highly rated by all stakeholder groups: creating tools and systems to facilitate and evaluate patient-centered medication management plans; developing training on patient-centered prescribing for providers; and increasing patients' knowledge about medication management. However, priorities differed across stakeholder groups. Notably, patients prioritized using peer support to improve medication management while researchers did not. Engaging multiple stakeholders in setting a patient-centered research agenda and broadening the scope of adherence interventions to include other aspects of medication management resulted in priorities outside the traditional scope of adherence research. Workshop participants recognized the potential benefits of patient-centered medication management but also identified many challenges to implementation that require additional research and innovation. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Developments in Surge Research Priorities: A Systematic Review of the Literature Following the Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, 2007-2015.

PubMed

Morton, Melinda J; DeAugustinis, Matthew L; Velasquez, Christina A; Singh, Sonal; Kelen, Gabor D

2015-11-01

In 2006, Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) published a special issue summarizing the proceedings of the AEM consensus conference on the "Science of Surge." One major goal of the conference was to establish research priorities in the field of "disasters" surge. For this review, we wished to determine the progress toward the conference's identified research priorities: 1) defining criteria and methods for allocation of scarce resources, 2) identifying effective triage protocols, 3) determining decision-makers and means to evaluate response efficacy, 4) developing communication and information sharing strategies, and 5) identifying methods for evaluating workforce needs. Specific criteria were developed in conjunction with library search experts. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases were queried for peer-reviewed articles from 2007 to 2015 addressing scientific advances related to the above five research priorities identified by AEM consensus conference. Abstracts and foreign language articles were excluded. Only articles with quantitative data on predefined outcomes were included; consensus panel recommendations on the above priorities were also included for the purposes of this review. Included study designs were randomized controlled trials, prospective, retrospective, qualitative (consensus panel), observational, cohort, case-control, or controlled before-and-after studies. Quality assessment was performed using a standardized tool for quantitative studies. Of the 2,484 unique articles identified by the search strategy, 313 articles appeared to be related to disaster surge. Following detailed text review, 50 articles with quantitative data and 11 concept papers (consensus conference recommendations) addressed at least one AEM consensus conference surge research priority. Outcomes included validation of the benchmark of 500 beds/million of population for disaster surge capacity, effectiveness of simulation- and Internet

Priority-setting in public health research funding organisations: an exploratory qualitative study among five high-profile funders.

PubMed

Cartier, Yuri; Creatore, Maria I; Hoffman, Steven J; Potvin, Louise

2018-06-22

Priority-driven funding streams for population and public health are an important part of the health research landscape and contribute to orienting future scholarship in the field. While research priorities are often made public through targeted calls for research, less is known about how research funding organisations arrive at said priorities. Our objective was to explore how public health research funding organisations develop priorities for strategic extramural research funding programmes. Content analysis of published academic and grey literature and key informant interviews for five public and private funders of public health research in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States and France were performed. We found important distinctions in how funding organisations processed potential research priorities through four non-sequential phases, namely idea generation, idea analysis, idea socialisation and idea selection. Funders generally involved the public health research community and public health decision-makers in idea generation and socialisation, but other groups of stakeholders (e.g. the public, advocacy organisations) were not as frequently included. Priority-setting for strategic funding programmes in public health research involves consultation mainly with researchers in the early phase of the process. There is an opportunity for greater breadth of participation and more transparency in priority-setting mechanisms for strategic funding programmes in population and public health research.

Combining endangered plants and animals as surrogates to identify priority conservation areas in Yunnan, China

PubMed Central

Yang, Feiling; Hu, Jinming; Wu, Ruidong

2016-01-01

Suitable surrogates are critical for identifying optimal priority conservation areas (PCAs) to protect regional biodiversity. This study explored the efficiency of using endangered plants and animals as surrogates for identifying PCAs at the county level in Yunnan, southwest China. We ran the Dobson algorithm under three surrogate scenarios at 75% and 100% conservation levels and identified four types of PCAs. Assessment of the protection efficiencies of the four types of PCAs showed that endangered plants had higher surrogacy values than endangered animals but that the two were not substitutable; coupled endangered plants and animals as surrogates yielded a higher surrogacy value than endangered plants or animals as surrogates; the plant-animal priority areas (PAPAs) was the optimal among the four types of PCAs for conserving both endangered plants and animals in Yunnan. PAPAs could well represent overall species diversity distribution patterns and overlap with critical biogeographical regions in Yunnan. Fourteen priority units in PAPAs should be urgently considered as optimizing Yunnan’s protected area system. The spatial pattern of PAPAs at the 100% conservation level could be conceptualized into three connected conservation belts, providing a valuable reference for optimizing the layout of the in situ protected area system in Yunnan. PMID:27538537

Combining endangered plants and animals as surrogates to identify priority conservation areas in Yunnan, China

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Yang, Feiling; Hu, Jinming; Wu, Ruidong

2016-08-01

Suitable surrogates are critical for identifying optimal priority conservation areas (PCAs) to protect regional biodiversity. This study explored the efficiency of using endangered plants and animals as surrogates for identifying PCAs at the county level in Yunnan, southwest China. We ran the Dobson algorithm under three surrogate scenarios at 75% and 100% conservation levels and identified four types of PCAs. Assessment of the protection efficiencies of the four types of PCAs showed that endangered plants had higher surrogacy values than endangered animals but that the two were not substitutable; coupled endangered plants and animals as surrogates yielded a higher surrogacy value than endangered plants or animals as surrogates; the plant-animal priority areas (PAPAs) was the optimal among the four types of PCAs for conserving both endangered plants and animals in Yunnan. PAPAs could well represent overall species diversity distribution patterns and overlap with critical biogeographical regions in Yunnan. Fourteen priority units in PAPAs should be urgently considered as optimizing Yunnan’s protected area system. The spatial pattern of PAPAs at the 100% conservation level could be conceptualized into three connected conservation belts, providing a valuable reference for optimizing the layout of the in situ protected area system in Yunnan.

Priorities for clinical research in intracerebral hemorrhage: report from a National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke workshop.

PubMed

2005-03-01

Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is one of the most lethal stroke types. In December 2003, a National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) workshop was convened to develop a consensus for ICH research priorities. The focus was clinical research aimed at acute ICH in patients. Workshop participants were divided into 6 groups: (1) current state of ICH research; (2) basic science; and (3) imaging, (4) medical, (5) surgical, and (6) clinical methodology. Each group formulated research priorities before the workshop. At the workshop, these were discussed and refined. Recent progress in management of hemorrhage growth, intraventricular hemorrhage, and limitations in the benefit of open craniotomy were noted. The workshop identified the importance of developing animal models to reflect human ICH, as well as the phenomena of rebleeding. More human ICH pathology is needed. Real-time, high-field magnets and 3-dimensional imaging, as well as high-resolution tissue probes, are ICH imaging priorities. Trials of acute blood pressure-lowering in ICH and coagulopathy reversal are medical priorities. The exact role of edema in human ICH pathology and its treatment requires intensive study. Trials of minimally invasive surgical techniques including mechanical and chemical surgical adjuncts are critically important. The methodologic challenges include establishing research networks and a multi-specialty approach. Waiver of consent issues and standardizing care in trials are important issues. Encouragement of young investigators from varied backgrounds to enter the ICH research field is critical. Increasing ICH research is crucial. A collaborative approach is likely to yield therapies for this devastating form of brain injury.

Involving citizens in priority setting for public health research: Implementation in infection research.

PubMed

Rawson, Timothy M; Castro-Sánchez, Enrique; Charani, Esmita; Husson, Fran; Moore, Luke S P; Holmes, Alison H; Ahmad, Raheelah

2018-02-01

Public sources fund the majority of UK infection research, but citizens currently have no formal role in resource allocation. To explore the feasibility and willingness of citizens to engage in strategic decision making, we developed and tested a practical tool to capture public priorities for research. A scenario including six infection themes for funding was developed to assess citizen priorities for research funding. This was tested over two days at a university public festival. Votes were cast anonymously along with rationale for selection. The scenario was then implemented during a three-hour focus group exploring views on engagement in strategic decisions and in-depth evaluation of the tool. 188/491(38%) prioritized funding research into drug-resistant infections followed by emerging infections(18%). Results were similar between both days. Focus groups contained a total of 20 citizens with an equal gender split, range of ethnicities and ages ranging from 18 to >70 years. The tool was perceived as clear with participants able to make informed comparisons. Rationale for funding choices provided by voters and focus group participants are grouped into three major themes: (i) Information processing; (ii) Knowledge of the problem; (iii) Responsibility; and a unique theme within the focus groups (iv) The potential role of citizens in decision making. Divergent perceptions of relevance and confidence of "non-experts" as decision makers were expressed. Voting scenarios can be used to collect, en-masse, citizens' choices and rationale for research priorities. Ensuring adequate levels of citizen information and confidence is important to allow deployment in other formats. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Research priorities on ending child marriage and supporting married girls.

PubMed

Svanemyr, Joar; Chandra-Mouli, Venkatraman; Raj, Anita; Travers, Ellen; Sundaram, Lakshmi

2015-09-03

Over the past few years the issue of child marriage has received growing political and programmatic attention. In spite of some progress in a number of countries, global rates have not declined over the past decade. Knowledge gaps remain in understanding trends, drivers and approaches to ending child marriage, especially to understand what is needed to achieve results on a large scale. This commentary summarizes the outcomes of an Expert Group Meeting organized by World Health Organization to discuss research priorities on Ending Child Marriage and Supporting Married Girls. It presents research gaps and recommends priorities for research in five key areas; (i) prevalence and trends of child marriage; (ii) causes of child marriage (iii) consequences of child marriage; (iv) efforts to prevent child marriage; (v) efforts to support married girls.

Patient needs and research priorities in the enteral nutrition market - a quantitative prioritization analysis.

PubMed

Weenen, T C; Jentink, A; Pronker, E S; Commandeur, H R; Claassen, E; Boirie, Y; Singer, P

2014-10-01

A quantitative systematic identification and prioritization of unmet needs and research opportunities in relation to enteral nutrition was conducted by means of a tailor-made health research prioritization process. The research objectives were reached by conducting qualitative interviews followed by quantitative questionnaires targeting enteral nutrition key opinion leaders (KOLs). (1) Define disease areas that deserve more research attention; (2) Rank importance of product characteristics of tube feeding (TF) and oral nutritional supplements (ONS); (3) Assess involvement of KOLs in enteral nutrition R&D process. KOLs ranked three product characteristics and three disease areas that deserve additional research attention. From these, overall priority scores were calculated by multiplying ranks for both product characteristics and disease areas. 17 qualitative interviews were conducted and 77 questionnaires (response rate 35%) were completed and returned. (1) Disease areas in ONS and TF with highest priorities are: ONS: general malnutrition & geriatrics, TF: intensive care. (2) TF product characteristics with highest priorities are: composition and clinical evidence from a KOL perspective; tolerance and ease of use from a patient perspective. ONS product characteristics with highest priorities are: composition, clinical evidence and taste from a KOL perspective; taste from a patient perspective. We find a high discrepancy between product characteristic prioritization from a KOL and patient perspective. (3) Although 62% of all KOLs give advice to enteral nutrition companies on patient needs, they under-influence the setting of research priorities by enteral nutrition companies. This study provides a systematic approach to achieve research prioritization in enteral nutrition. In addition to providing new directions for enteral nutrition research and development, this study highlights the relevance of involving KOLs in the identification of research priorities as they

Priorities for Antiretroviral Therapy Research in Sub-Saharan Africa: A 2002 Consensus Conference in Zambia

PubMed Central

Zulu, Isaac; Schuman, Paula; Musonda, Rosemary; Chomba, Elwyn; Mwinga, Kasonde; Sinkala, Moses; Chisembele, Maureen; Mwaba, Peter; Kasonde, Dorothy; Vermund, Sten H.

2009-01-01

Background A consensus conference was held to discuss priorities for antiretroviral therapy (ART) research in Zambia, one of the world’s most heavily HIV-afflicted nations. Zambia, like other resource-limited settings, has increasing access to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) because of declining drug costs, use of government-purchased generic medications, and increased global donations. For sustained delivery of care with HAART in a resource-constrained medical and public health context, operational research is required and clinical trials are desirable. The priority areas for research are most relevant today given the increasing availability of HAART. Methods A conference was held in Lusaka, Zambia, in January 2002 to discuss priority areas for ART research in Zambia, with participants drawn from a broad cross section of Zambian society. State-of-the-art reviews and 6 intensive small group discussions helped to formulate a suggested research agenda. Results Conference participants believed that the most urgent research priorities were to assess how therapeutic resources could be applied for the greatest overall benefit and to minimize the impact of nonadherence and viral resistance. Identified research priorities were as follows: To determine when to initiate HAART in relation to CD4+ cell count To assess whether HIV/AIDS can be managed well without the use of costly frequent viral load measurements and CD4+ cell count monitoring To assess whether HIV/AIDS can be managed in the same fashion in patients coinfected with opportunistic infections such as tuberculosis and HIV-related chronic diarrhea, taking into consideration complications that may occur in tuberculosis such as immune reconstitution syndrome and medication malabsorption in the presence of diarrhea To carefully assess and characterize toxicities, adverse effects, and viral resistance patterns in Zambia, including studies of mothers exposed to prepartum single-dose nevirapine To conduct

78 FR 2919 - Proposed Priority-National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Disability and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-15

... Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Research Project--Inclusive Cloud and Web Computing CFDA... inclusive Cloud and Web computing. The Assistant Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal... Priority for Inclusive Cloud and Web Computing'' in the subject line of your electronic message. FOR...

Living with Parkinson's disease: priorities for research suggested by patients.

PubMed

Schipper, K; Dauwerse, L; Hendrikx, A; Leedekerken, J W; Abma, T A

2014-08-01

To describe a study in which patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) were engaged to list priorities for research to complement the professionals' research agenda. The study was conducted by researchers and people with PD or relatives. Interviews and focus groups were held to develop a research agenda from patients' perspectives. A questionnaire was completed by patients to prioritize the research topics. Voiceover group meetings and meetings with the advisory group were organized to obtain feedback on the research process and to deliberate the preliminary findings. Finally, dialog meetings were organized with stakeholders to discuss the agenda and to achieve a shared research agenda. Patients prioritized 18 research themes. Top priorities included fundamental research, research on medication, coping, family & relations and good care. Patients asked for applied and multidisciplinary research. Professionals and charitable funding bodies acknowledged the importance of such research but did not feel capable of judging such proposals. Patients furthermore asked for more attention to be paid to living with the illness in the here-and-now to complement fundamental research. The patients' research agenda can be used to match research with patients' needs and to adapt the clinical support of professionals to patients' wishes. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The conservation and management of tunas and their relatives: setting life history research priorities.

PubMed

Juan-Jordá, Maria José; Mosqueira, Iago; Freire, Juan; Dulvy, Nicholas K

2013-01-01

Scombrids (tunas, bonitos, Spanish mackerels and mackerels) support important fisheries in tropical, subtropical and temperate waters around the world, being one of the most economically- and socially-important marine species globally. Their sustainable exploitation, management and conservation depend on accurate life history information for the development of quantitative fisheries stock assessments, and in the fishery data-poor situations for the identification of vulnerable species. Here, we assemble life history traits (maximum size, growth, longevity, maturity, fecundity, spawning duration and spawning interval) for the 51 species of scombrids globally. We identify major biological gaps in knowledge and prioritize life history research needs in scombrids based on their biological gaps in knowledge, the importance of their fisheries and their current conservation status according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List. We find that the growth and reproductive biology of tunas and mackerel species have been more extensively studied than for Spanish mackerels and bonitos, although there are notable exceptions in all groups. We also reveal that reproductive biology of species, particular fecundity, is the least studied biological aspect in scombrids. We identify two priority groups, including 32 species of scombrids, and several populations of principal market tunas, for which life history research should be prioritized following the species-specific life history gaps identified in this study in the coming decades. By highlighting the important gaps in biological knowledge and providing a priority setting for life history research in scombrid species this study provides guidance for management and conservation and serves as a guide for biologists and resource managers interested in the biology, ecology, and management of scombrid species.

The Conservation and Management of Tunas and Their Relatives: Setting Life History Research Priorities