Nutrition Research Initiative Research Articles

Health research priorities in Pakistan: A Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) exercise.

The National Health Vision of Pakistan 2016-2025 is to provide affordable health services through a resilient and responsive health system for achieving health-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and universal health coverage (UHC) targets. Through this study, we wanted to identify the research priorities at the national level that would help to provide the necessary evidence for achieving this vision through essential package of health services (EPHS). We followed World Health Organization (WHO) guidance for undertaking research priority-setting exercises and the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology in conducting this national exercise. The proposed research options for the next three to five years were identified in five thematic research areas: communicable diseases; non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and injuries; reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health (RMNCAH); mental health; and health systems and services. We assessed these research options against five priority-setting criteria: feasibility, public health importance, sustainability, equity, and community involvement. Forty-three experts proposed 272 research ideas, which were consolidated into a list of 155 research options and sent back to the experts for scoring. The top 10 research priorities in each of the five research areas were identified based on the weighted research priority scores (wRPS) rankings. Tuberculosis and antimicrobial resistance; NCD screening and prevention; maternal and neonatal mortality; mental health of children, adolescents, and youth; and human resource management were the issues that were most frequently reflected in the list of research priorities. Most research priorities aimed to identify barriers to the implementation of interventions. Through this exercise, we identified the top 50 national health research priorities, which also have a strong correlation with EPHS interventions. To realise the findings of this exercise, funding agencies should establish funding mechanisms to support the undertaking of the identified research priorities, and academic researchers should actually utilise them in future studies. Such activities could hopefully contribute to achieving the national health goals.

Identifying interventions that improve medication safety & rational use of medicines in India.

Background & objectives Medication-related harm is known to be the cause for about 1/10th of hospitalizations. Some estimates from India show that about 90 per cent of medicines consumed are inessential or irrational and contribute towards high out-of-pocket expenditure on health. In this context, the Indian Council of Medical Research in 2022 constituted a National Task Force (NTF) to explore possible solutions that could improve safe and rational use of medicines (SRUMs). The objective of this study was to identify research ideas in the field of SRUM through a survey of relevant stakeholders, and further to prioritize the research ideas using a pre-identified set of criteria. Methods The responses from the identified stakeholders were assessed using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method, which is an established research priority-setting methodology. First, the NTF asked for two to six research ideas from relevant Indian and global stakeholders on solutions to improve SRUM. The ideas were checked for duplicates, re-phrased where necessary and classified into various sub-themes. Subsequently, the research ideas were scored by Indian experts with relevant technical expertise using a pre-defined set of five criteria: innovativeness, effectiveness, translational value, answerability and applicability. Each research idea received from a stakeholder was assigned a score under each of the five criteria. The overall research priority score was calculated as a mean of all five criteria-specific scores and converted into a percentage. Results The final output of the prioritization process was a list of research ideas or questions, ranked by their scores. Total 209 unique ideas were received from 190 respondents, which were scored by 27 experts. The top three research topics on medication safety focused on cost-effective strategies for improving antimicrobial stewardship, safe use of poly-pharmacy in geriatric patients and drug take-back policy interventions. Regarding the rational use of medicine, the top three topics included testing mobile application-based antimicrobial stewardship interventions, development of diagnostics for antimicrobial resistance, and behavioural interventions. Interpretation & conclusions Several priority ideas found in this study also align with those of global priority, e.g., safe disposal practices and enhanced pharmacovigilance, rational use of medicines. Patient engagement, which underlines many of the top scoring ideas found in this study, is also inclined with the top research priorities reported by the WHO priority exercise on research into the safe use of medicines. However, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first such work from a low- and middle- income country on medication safety and rational use of medicines. The findings of this research priority-setting exercise can help to guide research for the development of policy-relevant and novel interventions to improve SRUM in India.

Priorities for Clinical Research in Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Anticoagulation From the Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Anticoagulation CollaborativE Consensus Conference.

To identify and prioritize research questions for anticoagulation and hemostasis management of neonates and children supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) from the Pediatric ECMO Anticoagulation CollaborativE (PEACE) consensus. Systematic review was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) databases from January 1988 to May 2021, followed by serial consensus conferences of international, interprofessional experts in the management of ECMO for critically ill neonates and children. The management of ECMO anticoagulation for critically ill neonates and children. Within each of the eight subgroups, two authors reviewed all citations independently, with a third independent reviewer resolving any conflicts. Following the systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1988 to May 2021, and the consensus process for clinical recommendations and consensus statements, PEACE panel experts constructed research priorities using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology. Twenty research topics were prioritized, falling within five domains (definitions and outcomes, therapeutics, anticoagulant monitoring, protocolized management, and impact of the ECMO circuit and its components on hemostasis). We present the research priorities identified by the PEACE expert panel after a systematic review of existing evidence informing clinical care of neonates and children managed with ECMO. More research is required within the five identified domains to ultimately inform and improve the care of this vulnerable population.

Co-creating a global shared research agenda on violence against women in low- and middle-income countries

BackgroundDespite a large growth in evidence on violence against women (VAW) over the last 25 years, VAW persists, as do gaps in the field’s knowledge of how to prevent and respond to it. To ensure that research on VAW in low- and middle-income countries (LIMCs) is addressing the most significant gaps in knowledge, and to prioritise evidence needs to reduce VAW and better support victims/survivors, the Sexual Violence Research Initiative (SVRI) and Equality Institute (EQI) led a process of developing a global shared research agenda (GSRA) on VAW in LMICs.MethodsThe GSRA was developed through a six-stage adaptation of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, which draws on the principle of the ‘wisdom of the crowd’. These steps included: a review of the literature on VAW in LMICs and development of domains; the generation of research questions within four domains by an Advisory Group; the consolidation of research questions; scoring of research questions by a Global Expert Group and the Advisory Group according to three criteria (applicability, effectiveness and equity); consultation and validation of the findings with the Advisory Group; and wide dissemination of the findings.ResultsThe highest ranked research questions in the GSRA pertain to the domain of Intervention research, with some highly ranked questions also pertaining to the domain of Understanding VAW in its multiple forms. Questions under the other two domains, Improving existing interventions, and Methodological and measurement gaps, were not prioritised as highly by experts. There was strong consistency in top ranked research questions according to experts’ characteristics, albeit with some important differences according to experts’ gender, occupation and geographical location.ConclusionsThe GSRA findings suggest that currently the VAW field is shifting towards intervention research after several decades of building evidence on understanding VAW, including prevalence, drivers and impacts of violence. The findings also suggest a strong emphasis on under-served populations, and under-researched forms of VAW. Future priority setting exercises in LMICs that seek to decolonise knowledge should ensure that methodologies, and modalities of engagement, put diverse voices at the centre of engagement.Trial registration Not applicable

Supporting Ontario public health units to address adverse childhood experiences in pandemic recovery planning: A priority-setting exercise

BackgroundAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are potentially traumatic exposures experienced during childhood, for example, neglect. There is growing evidence that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and related socioeconomic conditions contributed to an increased risk of ACEs. As public health programs/services are re-evaluated and restored following the state of emergency, it is important to plan using an ACEs-informed lens. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritize initiatives or activities that Public Health Ontario (PHO) could undertake to support Ontario public health units’ work towards ACEs-informed pandemic recovery plans.MethodsThe Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method was adapted to conduct a priority-setting exercise (May–October 2022). Two online surveys were administered with members of the Healthy Growth and Development (HGD) Evidence Network, comprised of public health unit staff working in child and family health/HGD from Ontario’s 34 public health units. In the first survey, participants were asked to propose activities or initiatives that PHO could undertake to support Ontario public health units’ work towards ACEs-informed planning. In the second survey, participants were asked to score the final list of options against pre-determined prioritization criteria (for example, relevance). Responses were numerically coded and used to calculate prioritization scores, which were used to rank the options.ResultsIn all, 76% of public health units (n = 26) responded to the first survey to identify options. The 168 proposed ideas were consolidated into a final list of 13 options, which fall under PHO’s scientific and technical support mandate areas (data and surveillance, evidence synthesis, collaboration and networking, knowledge exchange and research). A total of 79% of public health units (n = 27) responded to the follow-up survey to prioritize options. Prioritization scores ranged from 76.4% to 88.6%. The top-ranked option was the establishment of a new provincial ACEs community of practice.ConclusionsOver three quarters of public health units contributed to identifying and ranking 13 options for PHO to support public health units in considering and addressing ACEs through pandemic recovery planning. In consultation with the ACEs and Resilience Community of Practice, recently formed on the basis of this exercise, PHO will continue to use the ranked list of options to inform work-planning activities/priorities.

Establishing a research partnership to investigate functional loss and rehabilitation towards the end of life.

Functional loss, the inability to perform necessary or desired tasks, is a common consequence of life-limiting illnesses and associated symptoms (pain, fatigue, breathlessness, etc.) and causes suffering for patients and families. Rehabilitation, a set of interventions designed to address functional loss, is recognised as essential within palliative care, as it can improve quality of life and reduce care costs. However, not everyone has equal access to rehabilitation. Despite limited life expectancy or uncertain ability to benefit from interventions, palliative rehabilitation services are often absent. This is partly due to a lack of high-quality research around optimal models of rehabilitation. Research in this area is methodologically challenging and requires multidisciplinary and cross-speciality collaboration. We aimed to establish and grow a United Kingdom research partnership across diverse areas, commencing with partners from Edinburgh, East Anglia, Lancashire, Leeds, London and Nottingham, around the topic area of functional loss and rehabilitation in palliative and end-of-life care. The objectives were to (1) develop a multidisciplinary, cross-speciality research partnership, (2) generate high-priority unanswered research questions with stakeholders, (3) co-design and submit high-quality competitive research proposals, including (4) sharing topic and methodological expertise, and (5) to build capacity and capability to deliver nationally generalisable studies. The partnership was established with professionals from across England and Scotland with complementary areas of expertise including complex palliative and geriatric research, physiotherapy, nursing, palliative medicine and psychology. Research questions were generated through a modified version of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative, which allowed for the collation and refinement of research questions relating to functional loss and rehabilitation towards the end of life. Partnership members were supported through a series of workshops to transform research ideas into proposals for submission to stage one calls by the National Institute for Health and Care Research. The partnership not only supported students, clinicians and public members with training opportunities but also supported clinicians in securing protected time from clinical duties to allow them to focus on developing local research initiatives. Through our partnership we established a network that offered researchers, clinicians, students and public members the chance to develop novel skills and explore opportunities for personal and professional development around the topic area of functional loss and rehabilitation in palliative and end-of-life care. The partnership was crucial to foster collaboration and facilitate exchange of ideas, knowledge and experiences to build joint research study proposals. This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) programme as award number NIHR135171. A plain language summary of this article is available on the NIHR Journals Library website https://doi.org/10.3310/PTHC7598.

Research priorities for water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) in humanitarian crises: A global prioritisation exercise

Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions should provide access to safe water and sanitation, and promote good hygiene practices with dignity, comfort and security. Multiple systematic reviews have noted evidence gaps and is a paucity of good quality evidence related to the effectiveness and implementation of WASH programmes and interventions in humanitarian crises. The aim of this study was to generate consensus-based actionable research priorities for the humanitarian WASH sector. A research prioritisation exercise was conducted by adapting the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method. Research questions were compiled from a rapid scoping review, key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs). Questions were reviewed by a technical expert group. An online survey was circulated to score research questions according to five criteria. An overall prioritisation score was calculated and weighted to prioritise questions. A diverse range of 286 global WASH and health experts engaged in the CHNRI process. A list of 128 questions were generated and scored by experts. Prioritised research questions focussed on evaluating existing interventions or programmes, and making iterative changes to current programmes. Other important questions centred on describing WASH conditions and associated health risks in crises contexts. Priorities were also stratified by gender, organisation and region to understand differences globally. The WASH in Crises Research Agenda has identified key research questions of most importance to those implementing WASH in humanitarian crises and has established a list of research priorities. The identified priorities reinforce how more evidence is needed, and underlines the need for research to evaluate current practices in order to improve the quality of humanitarian response. Stakeholders, including donors, international and national organisations, governments and academic institutions, are invited to use this research agenda to encourage, inspire and enable relevant and high-quality research that will be used to inform humanitarian responses.

Ethics and health research priority setting: a narrative review.

This narrative review aims to describe current practice and ongoing discussions in the academic literature regarding ethics and health research priority setting. It begins with some preliminary distinctions regarding types of research priority setting. It then gives some background on current practice with respect to formal research priority setting exercises, including summaries of The Ad Hoc Committee on Health Research method, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, the Combined Approach Matrix (CAM), the Delphi method, the Essential National Health Research (ENHR) strategy for priority setting, and the James Lind Alliance (JLA) framework. The majority of the paper reports the results of a literature review covering specifically ethical issues under the thematic headings of process criteria, substantive criteria, global justice, the obligations of specific actors, and research topics. It closes with some summary thoughts about apparent gaps and directions for future investigation.

Telmisartan Plus Amlodipine as the Preferred Initial Combination in Newly Diagnosed Indian Patients with Hypertension: An Expert Consensus Statements.

Hypertension (HTN) remains one of the most important risk factors for cardiovascular (CV) diseases and a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Despite improvement in detection and treatment, poor blood pressure (BP) control rates are observed globally. The situation in India is alarming with only 22.5% of patients maintaining their BP under control. Initiating early and effective treatment for HTN helps control BP within normal limits and reduces associated health risks. In India, currently, there are no guidelines on the choice of dual combination treatment that can be considered an initial treatment for newly diagnosed HTN patients to achieve effective BP control and reduce CV risks. To provide consensus recommendations for preferred initial combinations in newly diagnosed Indian patients with HTN. A core group of 100 experts with HTN expertise conceptualized and formulated the four key questions based on answerability, effectiveness, potential for translation to clinical practice, novelty, and potential impact on the healthcare burden. A mix of Delphi and Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods was adopted for acceptance or refusal of recommendations. Likert scale 1-9 was used for scoring. A score of ≥7 was considered "statement accepted," >6.50 "near to acceptance" and <6.50 "not accepted." A vote of ≥7 by at least two-thirds of the experts (66.66%) was mandatory for acceptance of the recommendation. Combination therapy could be necessary for a majority of newly diagnosed Indian patients for effective BP control. It can manage HTN with better clinical outcomes. Based on mean rating scores from experts, telmisartan plus amlodipine can be considered the preferred initial combination in the management of newly diagnosed Indian patients with HTN to achieve better BP control and improve CV outcomes.

Research priorities for improving menstrual health across the life-course in low- and middle-income countries

ABSTRACT Background Research on menstrual health is required to understand menstrual needs and generate solutions to improve health, wellbeing, and productivity. The identification of research priorities will help inform where to invest efforts and resources. Objectives To identify research priorities for menstrual health across the life-course, in consultation with a range of stakeholder groups from a variety of geographic regions, and to identify if menstrual health research priorities varied by expertise. Methods A modified version of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative approach was utilized to reach consensus on a set of research priorities. Multisector stakeholders with menstrual health expertise, identified through networks and the literature, were invited to submit research questions through an online survey. Responses were consolidated, and individuals were invited to rank these questions based on novelty, potential for intervention, and importance/impact. Research priority scores were calculated and evaluated by participants’ characteristics. Results Eighty-two participants proposed 1135 research questions, which were consolidated into 94 unique research questions. The mean number of questions did not differ between low- and middle-income country (LMIC) and high-income country (HIC) participants, but significantly more questions were raised by participants with expertise in mental health and WASH. Sixty-six participants then ranked these questions. The top ten-ranked research questions included four on ‘understanding the problem’, four on ‘designing and implementing interventions’, one on ‘integrating and scaling up’, and one on ‘measurement’. Indicators for the measurement of adequate menstrual health over time was ranked the highest priority by all stakeholders. Top ten-ranked research questions differed between academics and non-academics, and between participants from HICs and LMICs, reflecting differences in needs and knowledge gaps. Conclusions A list of ranked research priorities was generated through a consultative process with stakeholders across LMICs and HICs which can inform where to invest efforts and resources.

Bridging the gap: Using CHNRI to align migration health research priorities in India with local expertise and global perspectives.

Migration and health are increasingly recognised as a global public health priority, but concerns have been raised on the skewed nature of current research and the potential disconnect between health needs and policy and governance responses. The Migration Health South Asia (MiHSA) network led the first systematic research priority-setting exercise for India, aligned with the global call to develop a clearly defined migration health research agenda that will inform research investments and guide migrant-responsive policies by the year 2030. We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for this priority setting exercise for migration health. Guided by advisory groups established at international and country levels, we sought research topics from 51 experts from diverse disciplines and sectors across India. We consolidated 223 responses into 59 research topics across five themes and scored them against five predefined criteria: answerability, effectiveness, feasibility, impact, and effect on equity. We then calculated research priority scores (RPS) and average expert agreement (AEA) each research topic and theme. A third of the 59 research topics were on migrants' health and health care access, 12 on social determinants of migrants' health, 10 on policies, law and migration health governance, eight on health systems' responsiveness, and five on migration health discourse. Three of the top five priority topics pertained to migrants' health care access. The policies, law, and governance theme had the highest overall RPS score. There is a noticeable gap between research priorities identified by experts at the country-level and the current research focus and priorities set globally. This disconnect between the global and local perspectives in migration health scholarship hinders the development of context-specific and suitable policy agendas for improving migrants' health. Our co-developed agenda emphasises the need to prioritise research on the capacity of existing systems and policies so as to make them more migration-aware and responsive to migrants' health needs.

Health research prioritization in Somalia: setting the agenda for context specific knowledge to advance universal health coverage.

Despite recognition that health research is an imperative to progress toward universal health coverage, resources for health research are limited. Yet, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, more than 85% of the resources available for health research are spent on answering less relevant research questions. This misalignment is partially due to absence of locally determined health research priorities. In this study, we identified health research priorities which, if implemented, can inform local interventions required to accelerate progress toward universal health coverage in Somalia. We adapted the child health and nutrition research initiative method for research priority setting and applied it in 4 major phases: (1) establishment of an exercise management team, (2) a web-based survey among 84 respondents to identify health research questions; (3) categorization of identified health research questions; and (4) a workshop with 42 participants to score and rank the identified health research questions. Ethical approval was received from ethics review committee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (Ref:26524) and the Somali Research and Development Institute (Ref: EA0143). Two hundred and thirty-one unique health research questions were identified and categorized under health systems, services and social determinants (77), communicable diseases (54), non-communicable diseases (41) and reproductive, maternal, new-born, child, adolescent health and nutrition (59). A priority score ranging from 1 to 9 was assigned to each of the questions. For each category, a list of 10 questions with the highest priority scores was developed. Across the four categories, an overall list of 10 questions with the highest priority scores was also developed. These related to bottlenecks to accessing essential health services, use of evidence in decision making, antimicrobial resistance, distribution and risk factors for non-communicable diseases, post-traumatic stress disorder and factors associated with low antenatal care attendance among others. The developed priority research questions can be used to focus health research and to inform appropriation of health research resources to questions that contribute to generation of local health system knowledge which is required to accelerate progress toward universal health coverage in Somalia. The Somalia national institute of health should set up a consortium for provision of technical and financial support for research addressing the identified priority research questions, establish a mechanism to continuously monitor the extent to which new health interventions in Somalia are informed by knowledge generated through conducting prioritized health research and prioritize interventions aimed at strengthening the broader national health research system for Somalia.

Research prioritisation on prevention and management of preterm birth in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) with a special focus on Bangladesh using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method.

Fifteen million babies are born preterm globally each year, with 81% occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Preterm birth complications are the leading cause of newborn deaths and significantly impact health, quality of life, and costs of health services. Improving outcomes for newborns and their families requires prioritising research for developing practical, scalable solutions, especially in low-resource settings such as Bangladesh. We aimed to identify research priorities related to preventing and managing preterm birth in LMICs for 2021-2030, with a special focus on Bangladesh. We adopted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method to set research priorities for preventing and managing preterm birth. Seventy-six experts submitted 490 research questions online, which we collated into 95 unique questions and sent for scoring to all experts. A hundred and nine experts scored the questions using five pre-selected criteria: answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, maximum potential for burden reduction, and effect on equity. We calculated weighted and unweighted research priority scores and average expert agreement to generate a list of top-ranked research questions for LMICs and Bangladesh. Health systems and policy research dominated the top 20 identified priorities for LMICs, such as understanding and improving uptake of the facility and community-based Kangaroo Mother Care (KMC), promoting breastfeeding, improving referral and transport networks, evaluating the impact of the use of skilled attendants, quality improvement activities, and exploring barriers to antenatal steroid use. Several of the top 20 questions also focused on screening high-risk women or the general population of women, understanding the causes of preterm birth, or managing preterm babies with illnesses (jaundice, sepsis and retinopathy of prematurity). There was a high overlap between research priorities in LMICs and Bangladesh. This exercise, aimed at identifying priorities for preterm birth prevention and management research in LMICs, especially in Bangladesh, found research on improving the care of preterm babies to be more important in reducing the burden of preterm birth and accelerating the attainment of Sustainable Development Goal 3 target of newborn deaths, by 2030.

What more can be done? Prioritizing the most promising antenatal interventions to improve birth weight

BackgroundLow birth weight (LBW) is associated with neonatal mortality and sequelae of lifelong health problems; prioritizing the most promising antenatal interventions may guide resource allocation and improve health outcomes. ObjectiveWe sought to identify the most promising interventions that are not yet included in the policy recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) but could complement antenatal care and reduce the prevalence of LBW and related adverse birth outcomes in low- and middle-income settings. MethodsWe utilized an adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) prioritization method. ResultsIn addition to procedures already recommended by WHO for the prevention of LBW, we identified six promising antenatal interventions that are not currently recommended by WHO with an indication for LBW prevention, namely: (1) provision of multiple micronutrients; (2) low-dose aspirin; (3) high-dose calcium; (4) prophylactic cervical cerclage; (5) psychosocial support for smoking cessation; and (6) other psychosocial support for targeted populations and settings. We also identified seven interventions for further implementation research and six interventions for efficacy research. ConclusionThese promising interventions, coupled with increasing coverage of currently recommended antenatal care, could accelerate progress toward the global target of a 30% reduction in the number of LBW infants born in 2025 compared to 2006-10.

Global research priorities related to the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: results of a global consultation

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) published the WHO Labour Care Guide (LCG) in 2020 to support the implementation of its 2018 recommendations on intrapartum care. The WHO LCG promotes evidence-based labour monitoring and stimulates shared decision-making between maternity care providers and labouring women. There is a need to identify critical questions that will contribute to defining the research agenda relating to implementation of the WHO LCG.MethodsThis mixed-methods prioritization exercise, adapted from the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) and James Lind Alliance (JLA) methods, combined a metrics-based design with a qualitative, consensus-building consultation in three phases. The exercise followed the reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE). First, 30 stakeholders were invited to submit online ideas or questions (generation of research ideas). Then, 220 stakeholders were invited to score "research avenues" (i.e., broad research ideas that could be answered through a set of research questions) against six independent and equally weighted criteria (scoring of research avenues). Finally, a technical working group (TWG) of 20 purposively selected stakeholders reviewed the scoring, and refined and ranked the research avenues (consensus-building meeting).ResultsInitially, 24 stakeholders submitted 89 research ideas or questions. A list of 10 consolidated research avenues was scored by 75/220 stakeholders. During the virtual consensus-building meeting, research avenues were refined, and the top three priorities agreed upon were: (1) optimize implementation strategies of WHO LCG, (2) improve understanding of the effect of WHO LCG on maternal and perinatal outcomes, and the process and experience of labour and childbirth care, and (3) assess the effect of the WHO LCG in special situations or settings. Research avenues related to the organization of care and resource utilization ranked lowest during both the scoring and consensus-building process.ConclusionThis systematic and transparent process should encourage researchers, program implementers, and funders to support research aligned with the identified priorities related to WHO LCG. An international collaborative platform is recommended to implement prioritized research by using harmonized research tools, establishing a repository of research priorities studies, and scaling-up successful research results.

Setting a research agenda to advance maternal, newborn, and child health in Ethiopia: An adapted CHNRI prioritization exercise.

Critical to the improvement of maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) in Ethiopia - where 14 000 mothers die from pregnancy-, childbirth-, or postpartum-related complications each year - is high-quality research and its effective translation into policy and practice. While Ethiopia has rapidly expanded the number of institutions that train and conduct MNCH research, the absence of a shared research agenda inhibits a coordinated approach to inform critical MNCH policy needs. The HaSET Maternal and Child Health Research Program (MCHRP) conducted a mixed methods formative assessment and prioritization exercise to guide investments in future MNCH research in Ethiopia. We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, soliciting 56 priority research questions via key informant interviews. Through an online survey, experts scored these on their ability to generate new, actionable evidence that could inform more effective and equitable MNCH programs in Ethiopia. At a workshop in Addis Ababa, experts scored the questions by answerability and ethics, usefulness, disease burden reduction, and impact on equity. Research priority scores were calculated for both the online survey and workshop scoring and averaged to attain a ranked priority list. We validated and contextualized the results by conducting consensus-building discussions with MNCH experts and two community workshops. In total, approximately 100 participants were involved. Average research priority scores ranged from 58.4 to 83.7 out of 100.0. The top identified research priorities speak to critical needs in the Ethiopian context: to improve population coverage of proven interventions like integrated community case management (ICCM), family integrated newborn care, and kangaroo mother care (KMC); to better understand the determinants of outcomes like home deliveries, immunization drop-out, and antenatal and postpartum care-seeking; and to strengthen health system and workforce capabilities. This exercise expanded on the CHNRI methodology by comparing prioritization across different audiences, formats, and criteria. Agreement between both scoring rounds and consensus-building discussions was strong, demonstrating the reliability of the CHNRI method. By sharing this research priority list broadly among researchers, practitioners, and donors, we aim to improve coordinated MNCH evidence generation and translation into policy in Ethiopia.

Patient generated research priorities to improve diagnostic safety: A systematic prioritization exercise

BackgroundMost people experience a diagnostic error at least once in their lifetime. Patients’ experiences with their diagnosis could provide important insights when setting research priorities to reduce diagnostic error. ObjectiveOur objective was to engage patients in research agenda setting for improving diagnosis. Patient involvementPatients were involved in generating, discussing, prioritizing, and ranking of research questions for diagnostic error reduction. MethodsWe used the prioritization methodology based on the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI). We first solicited research questions important for diagnostic error reduction from a large group of patients. Thirty questions were initially prioritized at an in-person meeting with 8 patients who were supported by 4 researchers. The resulting list was further prioritized by patients who scored questions on five predefined criteria. We then applied previously determined weights to these prioritization criteria to adjust the final prioritization score for each question, resulting in 10 highest priority research questions. ResultsForty-one patients submitted 171 research questions. After prioritization, the highest priority topics included better care coordination across the diagnostic continuum and improving care transitions, improved identification and measurement of diagnostic errors and attention for implicit bias towards patients who are vulnerable to diagnostic errors. DiscussionWe systematically identified the top-10 patient generated research priorities for diagnostic error reduction using transparent and objective methods. Patients prioritized different research questions than researchers and therefore complemented an agenda previously generated by researchers. Practical valueResearch priorities identified by patients can be used by funders and researchers to conduct future research focused on reducing diagnostic errors. FundingThis project was funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation

Research priorities for nutrition of school-aged children and adolescents in low- and middle-income countries.

A lack of data, intervention studies, policies, and targets for nutrition in school-age children (SAC) and adolescents (5-19 years) is hampering progress towards tackling malnutrition. To stimulate and guide further research, this study generated a list of research priorities. Using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, a list of 48 research questions was compiled and questions were scored against defined criteria using a stakeholder survey. Questions covered all forms of malnutrition, including micronutrient deficiencies, thinness, stunting, overweight/obesity, and suboptimal dietary quality. The context was defined as research focused on SAC and adolescents, 5 to 19 years old, in low-and middle-income countries, that could achieve measurable results in reducing the prevalence of malnutrition in the next 10 years. Between 85 and 101 stakeholders responded per question. Respondents covered a broad geographical distribution across 38 countries, with the largest proportion focusing on work in East and Southern Africa. Of the research questions ranked in the top ten, half focused on delivery strategies for reaching adolescents and half on improving existing interventions. There were few differences in the ranked order of questions between age groups but those related to in-school children and adolescents had higher expert agreement than those for out-of-school adolescents. The top ranked research question focused on tailoring antenatal and postnatal care for pregnant adolescent girls. Nutrition programmes should incorporate implementation research to inform delivery of effective interventions to this age group, starting in schools. Academic research on the development and tailoring of existing nutrition interventions is also needed; specifically, on how to package multisectoral programmes and how to better reach vulnerable and underserved sub- groups, including those out of school.

Setting national research priorities for difficult-to-treat depression in the UK between 2021-2026.

Difficult-to-treat depression (DTD) presents a substantial health care challenge, with around one-third of people diagnosed with a depressive episode in the UK finding that their symptoms persist following treatment. This study aimed to identify priority research questions (RQs) that could inform the development of new and improved treatments, interventions, and support for people with DTD. Using an adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, this national prioritisation exercise engaged 60 leading researchers and health care professionals in the UK, as well as 25 wider stakeholders with relevant lived experience to produce a ranked list of priority RQs in DTD. The final list of 99 distinct RQs was independently scored by 42 individuals against a list of five criteria: answerability, effectiveness, impact on health, deliverability, and equity. Highly ranked RQs covered a range of novel and existing treatments. The three highest scoring RQs included evaluation of psychological and pharmacological therapies (eg, behavioural activation, and augmentation therapies), as well as social interventions to reduce loneliness or increase support for people with DTD. This exercise identified and prioritised 99 RQs that could inform future research and funding decisions over the next five years. The results of this research could improve treatment and support for people affected by DTD. It also serves as an example of ways in which the CHNRI method can be adapted in a collaborative manner to provide a more active role for patients, carers, and health care professionals.

Research priorities for maternal and perinatal health clinical trials and methods used to identify them: A systematic review

ObjectiveResearch prioritisation helps to target research resources to the most pressing health and healthcare needs of a population. This systematic review aimed to report research priorities in maternal and perinatal health and to assess the methods that were used to identify them. MethodsA systematic review was undertaken. Projects that aimed to identify research priorities that were considered to be amenable to clinical trials research were eligible for inclusion. The search, limited to the last decade and publications in English, included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, relevant Cochrane priority lists, Cochrane Priority Setting Methods Group homepage, James Lind Alliance homepage, Joanna Brigg’s register, PROSPERO register, reference lists of all included articles, grey literature, and the websites of relevant professional bodies, until 13 October 2020. The methods used for prioritisation were appraised using the Reporting Guideline for Priority Setting of Health Research (REPRISE). FindingsFrom the 62 included projects, 757 research priorities of relevance to maternal and perinatal health were identified. The most common priorities related to healthcare systems and services, pregnancy care and complications, and newborn care and complications. The least common priorities related to preconception and postpartum health, maternal mental health, contraception and pregnancy termination, and fetal medicine and surveillance.The most commonly used prioritisation methods were Delphi (20, 32%), Child Health Nutrition Research Initiative (17, 27%) and the James Lind Alliance (10, 16%). The fourteen projects (23%) that reported on at least 80% of the items included in the REPRISE guideline all used an established research prioritisation method. ConclusionsThere are a large number of diverse research priorities in maternal and perinatal health that are amenable to future clinical trials research. These have been identified by a variety of research prioritisation methods.