Identifying and prioritising systematic review topics with public health stakeholders: A protocol for a modified Delphi study in Switzerland to inform future research agendas

被引:12
|
作者
Hoekstra, Dyon [1 ,2 ]
Mutsch, Margot [3 ]
Kien, Christina [4 ]
Gerhardus, Ansgar [5 ]
Lhachimi, Stefan K. [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bremen, Leibniz Inst Prevent Res & Epidemiol BIPS, Res Grp Evidence Based Publ Hlth, Bremen, Germany
[2] Univ Bremen, Inst Publ Hlth & Nursing Res IPP, Bremen, Germany
[3] Inst Univ Zurich, Biost & Prevent Inst, Dept Epidemiol, Zurich, Switzerland
[4] Danube Univ Krems, Dept Evidence Based Med & Clin Epidemiol, Krems, Austria
[5] Univ Bremen, Inst Publ Hlth & Nursing Res IPP, Dept Hlth Serv Res, Bremen, Germany
[6] Univ Bremen, Res Grp Evidence Based Publ Hlth, Leibniz Inst Prevent Res & Epidemiol BIPS, Inst Publ Hlth & Nursing Res IPP,Hlth Sci, Bremen, Germany
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2017年 / 7卷 / 08期
关键词
SETTING PRIORITIES; RECOMMENDATIONS; COLLABORATION; PROJECTS; CRITERIA; AMERICA;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015500
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction The Cochrane Collaboration aims to produce relevant and top priority evidence that responds to existing evidence gaps. Hence, research priority setting (RPS) is important to identify which potential research gaps are deemed most important. Moreover, RPS supports future health research to conform both health and health evidence needs. However, studies that are prioritising systematic review topics in public health are surprisingly rare. Therefore, to inform the research agenda of Cochrane Public Health Europe (CPHE), we introduce the protocol of a priority setting study on systematic review topics in several European countries, which is conceptualised as pilot. Methods and analysis We will conduct a two-round modified Delphi study in Switzerland, incorporating an anonymous web-based questionnaire, to assess which topics should be prioritised for systematic reviews in public health. In the first Delphi round public health stakeholders will suggest relevant assessment criteria and potential priority topics. In the second Delphi round the participants indicate their (dis) agreement to the aggregated results of the first round and rate the potential review topics with the predetermined criteria on a four-point Likert scale. As we invite a wide variety of stakeholders we will compare the results between the different stakeholder groups. Ethics and dissemination We have received ethical approval from the ethical board of the University of Bremen, Germany (principal investigation is conducted at the University of Bremen) and a certificate of nonobjection from the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (fieldwork will be conducted in Switzerland). The results of this study will be further disseminated through peer reviewed publication and will support systematic review author groups (i.a. CPHE) to improve the relevance of the groups 'future review work. Finally, the proposed priority setting study can be used as a framework by other systematic review groups when conducting a priority setting study in a different context.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [1] A Structured Approach to Involve Stakeholders in Prioritising Topics for Systematic Reviews in Public Health
    Hoekstra, Dyon
    Muetsch, Margot
    Borchard, Annegret
    Kien, Christina
    Griebler, Ursula
    Von Elm, Erik
    Rehfuess, Eva
    Gerhardus, Ansgar
    Lhachimi, Stefan K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2024, 69
  • [2] Priority setting to support a public health research agenda: a modified Delphi study with public health stakeholders in Germany
    Dyon Hoekstra
    Ansgar Gerhardus
    Stefan K. Lhachimi
    Health Research Policy and Systems, 21
  • [3] Priority setting to support a public health research agenda: a modified Delphi study with public health stakeholders in Germany
    Hoekstra, Dyon
    Gerhardus, Ansgar
    Lhachimi, Stefan K.
    HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2023, 21 (01)
  • [4] Identifying public health competencies for Australian pharmacists: A modified Delphi study
    Warren, Robin
    Young, Louise
    Carlisle, Karen
    Heslop, Ian
    Glass, Beverley
    AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2025, 49 (01)
  • [5] Prioritisation of future research topics for children's hospice care by its key stakeholders: a Delphi study
    Malcolm, C.
    Knighting, K.
    Forbat, L.
    Kearney, N.
    PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2009, 23 (05) : 398 - 405
  • [6] Identifying Research Priorities in Digital Education for Health Care: Umbrella Review and Modified Delphi Method Study
    Potter, Alison
    Munsch, Chris
    Watson, Elaine
    Hopkins, Emily
    Kitromili, Sofia
    O'Neill, Iain Cameron
    Larbie, Judy
    Niittymaki, Essi
    Ramsay, Catriona
    Burke, Joshua
    Ralph, Neil
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2025, 27
  • [7] Youth participatory research evidence to inform health policy: a systematic review protocol
    Njelesani, Janet
    Hunleth, Jean
    BMJ OPEN, 2020, 10 (08):
  • [8] Engaging stakeholders and target groups in prioritising a public health intervention: the Creating Active School Environments (CASE) online Delphi study
    Morton, Katie L.
    Atkin, Andrew J.
    Corder, Kirsten
    Suhrcke, Marc
    Turner, David
    van Sluijs, Esther M. F.
    BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (01):
  • [9] Modelling with stakeholders to inform health and social service design and implementation: A systematic scoping review of descriptions and empirical research
    Pearson, Mark
    Manzi, Sean
    Pickup, Laura
    Wanner, Amanda
    Salmon, Andy
    Stein, Ken
    Lang, Iain
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2019, 14
  • [10] Key stakeholders' perspectives and experiences with defining, identifying and displaying gaps in health research: a qualitative study protocol
    Nyanchoka, Linda
    Tudur-Smith, Catrin
    Porcher, Raphael
    Hren, Darko
    BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (08):