Priority Topic Areas Research Articles

Analysis of Historical Federal R&D Priorities: The OMB-OSTP Memorandum and the R&D Section of the Analytical Perspectives in the President's Budget

Each year, the directors of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) jointly produce a memorandum of research and development priorities and how those priorities align with the fiscal year budget. This memo guides the actions of executive branch departments and agencies towards the administration’s science and technology priorities. By presenting these priorities yearly, these memoranda serve as a record of the science and technology priorities of respective Presidential administrations and, in turn, can reflect a changing science and technology policy landscape over the duration of several Presidential terms. This paper assesses how science and technology policy priorities, as established in these memoranda, are reflected in the Presidential budget within and across administrations. Additionally, this paper compares and analyzes priority topic areas from the OMB/OSTP memos with another representation of science and technology areas of emphasis: the research and development (R&D) section of the Analytical Perspectives in the President’s budget. The Analytical Perspectives document highlights items from the Presidential budget requests. This paper discerns the extent to which these two sources of priority-setting become aligned in order to identify trends in which science and technology topics are prioritized by the White House across time and administration. This study addresses two core research questions: 1) How do science and technology priorities change over time, both across and/or within Presidential administrations?; and 2) To what extent, if any, are the ideas in the OMB/OSTP science and technology priorities memoranda and the Analytical Perspectives documents aligned?

Development and Cognitive Testing of Occupational Safety and Health Questions for a Youth Survey: Addressing the Research Needs for a Vulnerable Working Population.

While more than 2.5 million U.S. high students worked in 2020, data to assess how work affects this group are sparse. To facilitate such research, a set of occupational safety and health questions for inclusion on the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) and other youth-focused surveys was developed. Survey questions about occupational experiences of young workers were adapted from other surveys or created de novo. Key audiences were engaged to define priority topic areas and develop draft questions, which were further refined through cognitive interviews with working youth. Twenty-one resulting questions spanned multiple work-related topics: employment status; health outcomes; psychosocial exposures; and safety climate. Cognitive testing revealed that youth (aged 14-19) had difficulty with temporal concepts. Some difficulties reflected the propensity of youth to engage in multiple, online, and informal jobs. During 3 rounds of interviews, questions were adjusted to better reflect youth employment circumstances and language. Four states added at least 1 work-related question to their 2023 Youth Risk Behavior Survey questionnaire, and the full set of questions has been disseminated to federal agencies and partners. Including tailored questions about employment in surveys of youth will facilitate occupational health surveillance for this group. Analysis of resulting data can help to close knowledge gaps, provide current prevalence data, inform policy, and allow development of focused prevention and intervention strategies to reduce adverse outcomes among young workers.

COVID-19 Scientific Publications From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, January 2020-January 2022.

High-quality scientific evidence underpins public health decision making. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) agency provides scientific data, including during public health emergencies. To understand CDC's contributions to COVID-19 science, we conducted a bibliometric evaluation of publications authored by CDC scientists from January 20, 2020, through January 20, 2022, by using a quality improvement approach (SQUIRE 2.0). We catalogued COVID-19 articles with ≥1 CDC-affiliated author published in a scientific journal and indexed in the World Health Organization's COVID-19 database. We identified priority topic areas from the agency's COVID-19 Public Health Science Agenda by using keyword scripts in EndNote and then assessed the impact of the published articles by using Scopus and Altmetric. During the first 2 years of the agency's pandemic response, CDC authors contributed to 1044 unique COVID-19 scientific publications in 208 journals. Publication topics included testing (n = 853, 82%); prevention strategies (n = 658, 63%); natural history, transmission, breakthrough infections, and reinfections (n = 587, 56%); vaccines (n = 567, 54%); health equity (n = 308, 30%); variants (n = 232, 22%); and post-COVID-19 conditions (n = 44, 4%). Publications were cited 40 427 times and received 81 921 news reports and 1 058 893 social media impressions. As the pandemic evolved, CDC adapted to address new scientific questions, including vaccine effectiveness, safety, and access; viral variants, including Delta and Omicron; and health equity. The agency's COVID-19 Public Health Science Agenda helped guide impactful scientific activities. CDC continues to evaluate COVID-19 priority topic areas and contribute to development of new scientific work. CDC is committed to monitoring emerging issues and addressing gaps in evidence needed to improve health.

Editing the editors: Aims and priorities of health professions education journals

Purpose Although health professions education (HPE) scholarship has flourished in recent decades, the influence of HPE journals has received little attention. This study examines the editorial policies and priorities of leading HPE journals. Methods Fourteen HPE journals with the highest impact factors were reviewed for their editorial aims, scope, intended readership, and priority topic areas. Text from journal websites was coded using thematic analysis. Results 10/14 HPE journals included in this study were linked to regional or national education societies. Two focussed predominantly on medicine, one on dentistry, one on nursing, one on nutrition, and the remaining nine on general HPE. Although journals differed in their projected aims and proposed readerships, four overarching editorial themes were identified: (1) methodological and theoretical rigor; (2) impact on practice; (3) global relevance; (4) advancing knowledge. Conclusions Leading HPE journals share a number of priority areas and principles, implying some cohesion and consensus amongst the HPE scholarly community. These journals prioritise impact at the level of individual practitioners. Given the importance of policy level change in the development and reform of HPE around the world, the relative lack of focus on policy impact in HPE journals is worthy of further exploration.

The Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research (GEAR) network approach: a protocol to advance stakeholder consensus and research priorities in geriatrics and dementia care in the emergency department

IntroductionIncreasingly, older adults are turning to emergency departments (EDs) to address healthcare needs. To achieve these research demands, infrastructure is needed to both generate evidence of intervention impact and advance...

19455 The impact of long-term construction on the health of older adults in New York City™s Chinatown

ABSTRACT IMPACT: This poster will demonstrate how a community issue from a CTSI Community Advisory Board member organization initiated a collaborative, community-engaged project to identify priority areas of concern and culturally appropriate mitigation strategies. OBJECTIVES/GOALS: Little is known about the health and psychosocial impact of construction on older adults living near construction sites. We applied a mixed methods approach to identify evidence-based strategies to mitigate community prioritized health and psychosocial concerns related to long-term construction on older adults in NYC’s Manhattan Chinatown. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: In Chinatown, where approximately 20% of its residents are seniors, many are poor, have a disability, and experience ambulatory difficulties. We used a mixed methods approach including: 1) a high level scoping review of the published literature on the health impact of long-term construction for older adults; 2) key informant interviews with stakeholders; and 3) a two-part community-engaged modified Delphi process to identify priority topic areas related to construction and older adults and evidence-informed, culturally-relevant mitigation strategies. Using priority areas identified through the modified Delphi process, we conducted a literature review on the health and psychosocial impact of construction on older adults. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We identified five priority topics: construction site emissions; noise; outdoor nocturnal lighting; neighborhood changes; and relocation. Long-term construction is associated with environmental and psychosocial consequences with greater negative impacts on vulnerable populations. Current NYC mitigation policies are based on general population and need revisions to consider impacts for the most vulnerable, e.g. older adults and children, to mitigate adverse health outcomes. Findings were shared with City Council members and resulted in enacting specific recommended mitigation strategies, e.g. double paned windows, etc. Seniors are highly susceptible to the effects of air pollution, noise, and environmental changes, with exposure associated with higher morbidity, mortality, and social isolation. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS: Long-term construction may pose serious health implications for seniors residing near construction sites. Standards and guidelines for the general population may not protect them. Community-driven coalitions, like community-academic partnerships, can successfully advance community priorities and inform strategies to protect the elderly.

Engaging Those Living With Moderate to Severe TBI and Their Caregivers in Research.

Despite the fact that millions of individuals living in the United States are coping with disabilities associated with traumatic brain injury (TBI), limited work has explored strategies for patient engagement in research among those with such injuries. The Coalition for Recovery and Innovation in Traumatic Brain Injury Care Across the Lifespan (CRITICAL) brought together those living with TBI, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and advocates with the goal of developing a new patient-centered research agenda. This platform was also used to explore strategies to engage those with moderate to severe TBI in the research process. The CRITICAL was formed of 6 survivors of moderate to severe TBI, 2 caregivers of survivors of moderate to severe TBI, and 8 TBI professionals. The CRITICAL identified 3 priority topic areas: Relationship Quality, Caregiver Needs, and Thriving. Furthermore, strategies associated with Communication, Preparation, and the Environment facilitated research engagement. Employing the strategies outlined in this article is expected to promote patient engagement in clinical research, which can improve patient-centered interventions and outcomes for individuals living with TBI.

2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group

The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group was coordinated and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health. It is designed to improve patient care and support informed decision making about asthma management in the clinical setting. This update addresses six priority topic areas as determined by the state of the science at the time of a needs assessment, and input from multiple stakeholders: Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide TestingIndoor Allergen MitigationIntermittent Inhaled CorticosteroidsLong-Acting Muscarinic AntagonistsImmunotherapy in the Treatment of Allergic AsthmaBronchial ThermoplastyA rigorous process was undertaken to develop these evidence-based guidelines. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s (AHRQ) Evidence-Based Practice Centers conducted systematic reviews on these topics, which were used by the Expert Panel Working Group as a basis for developing recommendations and guidance. The Expert Panel used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), an internationally accepted framework, in consultation with an experienced methodology team for determining the certainty of evidence and the direction and strength of recommendations based on the evidence. Practical implementation guidance for each recommendation incorporates findings from NHLBI-led patient, caregiver, and clinician focus groups. To assist clincians in implementing these recommendations into patient care, the new recommendations have been integrated into the existing Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3) asthma management step diagram format.

The Born in Bradford COVID-19 Research Study: Protocol for an adaptive mixed methods research study to gather actionable intelligence on the impact of COVID-19 on health inequalities amongst families living in Bradford

The UK COVID-19 lockdown has included restricting social movement and interaction to slow the spread of disease and reduce demand on NHS acute services. It is likely that the impacts of restrictions will hit the least advantaged disproportionately and will worsen existing structural inequalities amongst deprived and ethnic minority groups. The aim of this study is to deliver rapid intelligence to enable an effective COVID-19 response, including co-production of interventions, that address key issues in the City of Bradford, UK, and nationally. In the longer term we aim to understand the impacts of the response on health trajectories and inequalities in these. In this paper we describe our approach and protocol. We plan an adaptive longitudinal mixed methods approach embedded with Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohorts which have rich existing data (including questionnaire, routine health and biobank). All work packages (WP) interact and are ongoing. WP1 uses co-production and engagement methods with communities, decision-makers and researchers to continuously set (changing) research priorities and will, longer-term, co-produce interventions to aid the City’s recovery. In WP2 repeated quantitative surveys will be administered during lockdown (April-June 2020), with three repeat surveys until 12 months post-lockdown with an ethnically diverse pool of BiB participants (parents, children aged 9-13 years, pregnant women: total sample pool N=7,652, N=5,154, N=1,800). A range of health, social, economic and education outcomes will be assessed. In WP3 priority topics identified in WP1 and WP2 will be explored qualitatively. Initial priority topics include children’s mental wellbeing, health beliefs and the peri/post-natal period. Feedback loops will ensure findings are fed directly to decision-makers and communities (via WP1) to enable co-production of acceptable interventions and identify future priority topic areas. Findings will be used to aid development of local and national policy to support recovery from the pandemic and minimise health inequalities.

Second International Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia.

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is an autosomal dominant disease with an estimated prevalence of 1 in 5000 that is characterized by the presence of vascular malformations (VMs). These result in chronic bleeding, acute hemorrhage, and complications from shunting through VMs. The goal of the Second International HHT Guidelines process was to develop evidence-based consensus guidelines for the management and prevention of HHT-related symptoms and complications. The guidelines were developed using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) framework and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. The guidelines expert panel included expert physicians (clinical and genetic) in HHT from 15 countries, guidelines methodologists, health care workers, health care administrators, patient advocacy representatives, and persons with HHT. During the preconference process, the expert panel generated clinically relevant questions in 6 priority topic areas. A systematic literature search was done in June 2019, and articles meeting a priori criteria were included to generate evidence tables, which were used as the basis for recommendation development. The expert panel subsequently convened during a guidelines conference to conduct a structured consensus process, during which recommendations reaching at least 80% consensus were discussed and approved. The expert panel generated and approved 6 new recommendations for each of the following 6 priority topic areas: epistaxis, gastrointestinal bleeding, anemia and iron deficiency, liver VMs, pediatric care, and pregnancy and delivery (36 total). The recommendations highlight new evidence in existing topics from the first International HHT Guidelines and provide guidance in 3 new areas: anemia, pediatrics, and pregnancy and delivery. These recommendations should facilitate implementation of key components of HHT care into clinical practice.

The Born in Bradford COVID-19 Research Study: Protocol for an adaptive mixed methods research study to gather actionable intelligence on the impact of COVID-19 on health inequalities amongst families living in Bradford.

The UK COVID-19 lockdown has included restricting social movement and interaction to slow the spread of disease and reduce demand on NHS acute services. It is likely that the impacts of restrictions will hit the least advantaged disproportionately and will worsen existing structural inequalities amongst deprived and ethnic minority groups. The aim of this study is to deliver rapid intelligence to enable an effective COVID-19 response, including co-production of interventions, that address key issues in the City of Bradford, UK, and nationally. In the longer term we aim to understand the impacts of the response on health trajectories and inequalities in these. In this paper we describe our approach and protocol. We plan an adaptive longitudinal mixed methods approach embedded with Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohorts which have rich existing data (including questionnaire, routine health and biobank). All work packages (WP) interact and are ongoing. WP1 uses co-production and engagement methods with communities, decision-makers and researchers to continuously set (changing) research priorities and will, longer-term, co-produce interventions to aid the City's recovery. In WP2 repeated quantitative surveys will be administered during lockdown (April-June 2020), with three repeat surveys until 12 months post-lockdown with an ethnically diverse pool of BiB participants (parents, children aged 9-13 years, pregnant women: total sample pool N=7,652, N=5,154, N=1,800). A range of health, social, economic and education outcomes will be assessed. In WP3 priority topics identified in WP1 and WP2 will be explored qualitatively. Initial priority topics include children's mental wellbeing, health beliefs and the peri/post-natal period. Feedback loops will ensure findings are fed directly to decision-makers and communities (via WP1) to enable co-production of acceptable interventions and identify future priority topic areas. Findings will be used to aid development of local and national policy to support recovery from the pandemic and minimise health inequalities.

Maternal and Child Health Bureau's Autism Research Program.

To provide an overview and quantitatively demonstrate the reach of the Health Resources and Services Administration's Maternal and Child Health Bureau autism research program. We reviewed program reports and internal data from 59 autism research grantees. The US federal Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee's strategic plan questions were used as a framework to highlight the contributions of the autism research program in advancing the field. The autism research program grantees advance research in several ways. Grantees have strengthened the evidence for autism interventions by conducting 89 studies at 79 distinct research sites. A total of 212 708 participants have enrolled in autism research program studies and 361 researchers have contributed to furthering autism research. The program addresses topics that align with the majority of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee's priority topic areas, including advancements in treatments and interventions, services and supports, and identifying risk factors. Grantee products include 387 peer-reviewed publications, 19 tools, and 13 practice guidelines for improving care and intervention practices. The autism research program has contributed to medical advances in research, leveraged innovative training platforms to provide specialized training, and provided access to health services through research-based screening and diagnostic procedures. Autism research program studies have contributed to the development of evidence-based practice guidelines, informed policy guidelines, and quality improvement efforts to bolster advancements in the field. Although disparities still exist, the Health Resources and Services Administration's Maternal and Child Health Bureau can reduce gaps in screening and diagnosis by targeting interventions to underserved populations including minority and rural communities.

Improving Research and Practice: Priorities for Young Adults with Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities and Mental Health Needs

ABSTRACT Introduction: The Intellectual and Developmental Disability Mental Health (IDD-MH) Research Partnership was created to learn about the experiences and needs of young adults with IDD-MH while accessing and using mental health services. Our national partnership consists of six young adults, five professionals, researchers at Boston University, and representatives from Self Advocates Becoming Empowered and The Arc of the United States. Our partnership worked together virtually for one year. Methods: We designed and conducted a web survey with young adults with IDD-MH ages 18–30 living in the United States (n = 76). We also completed four national storytelling sessions (1 in person, 3 virtual) that included young adults with IDD-MH (n = 10) and parents of young adults with IDD-MH (n = 6). Results: We identified eight priority topic areas for young adults with IDD-MH: Transition to Adulthood, Insurance & Financial Resources, Professionals’ Competence, Understanding the Experiences of People who Communicate Differently, Hospitalization, Medication, Alternatives to Medication, and Social Supports. Conclusions: Using what we learned, we generated recommendations to advance research and practice in areas important to young adults with IDD-MH. These recommendations highlight the importance of community-based options, choice, autonomy, and control for young adults with IDD-MH.

Research priority setting in childhood chronic disease: a systematic review

ObjectiveTo evaluate research priority setting approaches in childhood chronic diseases and to describe the priorities of stakeholders including patients, caregivers/families and health professionals.DesignWe conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase,...

Identifying research priorities for public health research to address health inequalities: use of Delphi-like survey methods

BackgroundIn the funding of health research and public health research it is vital that research questions posed are important and that funded research meets a research need or a gap in evidence. Many methods are used in the identification of research priorities, however, these can be resource intensive, costly and logistically challenging. Identifying such research priorities can be particularly challenging for complex public health problems as there is a need to consult a number of experts across disciplines and with a range of expertise. This study investigated the use of Delphi-like survey methods in identifying important research priorities relating to health inequalities and framing tractable research questions for topic areas identified.MethodsThe study was conducted in two phases, both using Delphi-like survey methods. Firstly, public health professionals with an interest in health inequalities were asked to identify research priorities. Secondly academic researchers were asked to frame tractable research questions relating to the priorities identified. These research priorities identified using Delphi-like survey methods were subsequently compared to those identified using different methods.ResultsA total of 52 public health professionals and 21 academics across the United Kingdom agreed to take part. The response rates were high, from public health professionals across three survey rounds (69%, 50% and 40%) and from academics across one round (52%), indicating that participants were receptive to the method and motivated to respond. The themes identified as encompassing the most important research priorities were mental health, healthy environment and health behaviours. Within these themes, the topic areas that emerged most strongly included community interventions for prevention of mental health problems and the food and alcohol environment. Some responses received from academic researchers were (as requested) in the form of tractable research questions, whereas others contributed further potential topic areas instead.ConclusionsDelphi-like survey methods are practical and productive as a means of obtaining opinions from a wide number of relevant experts identifying potential priority topic areas for research; however, this method is less appropriate for framing tractable research questions.

An Evidence Map of the Women Veterans\u2019 Health Research Literature (2008\u20132015)

BackgroundWomen comprise a growing proportion of Veterans seeking care at Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare facilities. VA initiatives have accelerated changes in services for female Veterans, yet the corresponding literature has not been systematically reviewed since 2008. In 2015, VA Women’s Health Services and the VA Women’s Health Research Network requested an updated literature review to facilitate policy and research planning.MethodsThe Minneapolis VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program performed a systematic search of research related to female Veterans’ health published from 2008 through 2015. We extracted study characteristics including healthcare topic, design, sample size and proportion female, research setting, and funding source. We created an evidence map by organizing and presenting results within and across healthcare topics, and describing patterns, strengths, and gaps.ResultsWe identified 2276 abstracts and assessed each for relevance. We excluded 1092 abstracts and reviewed 1184 full-text articles; 750 were excluded. Of 440 included articles, 208 (47%) were related to mental health, particularly post-traumatic stress disorder (71 articles), military sexual trauma (37 articles), and substance abuse (20 articles). The number of articles addressing VA priority topic areas increased over time, including reproductive health, healthcare organization and delivery, access and utilization, and post-deployment health. Three or fewer articles addressed each of the common chronic diseases: diabetes, hypertension, depression, or anxiety. Nearly 400 articles (90%) used an observational design. Eight articles (2%) described randomized trials.ConclusionsOur evidence map summarizes patterns, progress, and growth in the female Veterans’ health and healthcare literature. Observational studies in mental health make up the majority of research. A focus on primary care delivery over clinical topics in primary care and a lack of sex-specific results for studies that include men and women have contributed to research gaps in addressing common chronic diseases. Interventional research using randomized trials is needed.

Pharmacist perceptions of competency: Identifying priority areas for a competency program development at an academic medical center.

Competency-based education models can serve as valuable resources for providing quality continuing education and professional development in healthcare. However, competency development programs can be stifled by scarce stakeholder involvement and insufficient recognition of resource challenges. Engaging pharmacists in program development can inform program design and prioritization of needs. To describe a process to assess pharmacist perceptions about competency development and to inform program design by identifying high priority topic areas based on perceived value, confidence in abilities, and frequency of use by pharmacists. Pharmacists at a large academic medical center were surveyed to examine opinions regarding competency development and identify perceived departmental value, personal confidence, and frequency of use for nine competency topic areas. Responses were aggregated to create scores for each of the three criteria related to the nine topics. Priority areas were topics with the highest relative scores in perceived value and frequency of use and lowest relative scores in confidence compared to the other areas. Survey responses were collected from 105 pharmacists (78.9% response rate). A majority indicated that competency assessment is a shared responsibility between the organization and individual pharmacists. Therapeutic knowledge was identified as the competency requiring the most immediate attention as it was perceived to have the highest departmental value and highest frequency of use, yet participants indicated low confidence regarding the topic. Competency development is a critical aspect of ensuring pharmacists are prepared for the rapidly evolving needs of the healthcare system. Organizations play an important role in identifying and developing pharmacist competencies aligned with institutional and individual needs. This study suggests that pharmacists and leaders at an academic medical center identified a shared responsibility for competency development. The process described here may provide a model for other medical centers with similar competency development needs.

U.S. Transportation and Health Tool: Data for action.

Transportation investments have the potential to improve health, but readily available data to guide transportation decisions that could promote health are limited. In October 2015, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released the Transportation and Health Tool (THT). The tool is a resource to help transportation professionals in states and metropolitan areas access data about transportation and health in their jurisdictions and stimulate discussions on how to improve public health through transportation planning and policy. To develop the tool, a multidisciplinary team identified 190 possible data indicators. Using input from expert panel workshops and criteria that addressed data availability, geographic scale, timeliness, feasibility, validity, and topic area, the team selected 14 transportation and health indicators that covered the four priority topic areas of safety, active transportation, air quality, and connectivity. The THT contains the raw values for each indicator and a standardized score to enable comparisons. Additionally, the THT contains 25 evidence-based strategies that can help practitioners in states and metropolitan areas take action to improve health outcomes.

VP109 Identifying Priorities For A National Health Research Funder

INTRODUCTION:It is vitally important that research questions posed are important and that funded research meets a research need or a gap in evidence; these needs may be observed at a local, national or international level. Identifying such research priorities for a national research funder can be challenging, particularly for complex health problems such as health inequalities, where there is a need to consult a large number of experts with a range of expertise. Many methods are used in the identification of such research priorities, however, these can be resource intensive, costly, and logistically challenging particularly where large numbers of people are required and geographical distances are great.METHODS:This study investigated the use of Delphi type survey methods in identifying important research priorities related to health inequalities. Public health professionals with an interest in health inequalities were asked to identify research priorities, these research priorities were subsequently compared to those identified using different methods.RESULTS:Fifty-two public health professionals agreed to take part, the response rates were high, (69 percent, 50 percent and 40 percent) across three survey rounds; which indicated that participants were receptive to the methodology and motivated to respond. The themes identified as encompassing the most important research priorities were: mental health, environmental issues and health behaviours. Within these themes, topic areas which emerged most strongly included: community interventions for prevention of mental health problems, and the food and alcohol environment.CONCLUSIONS:Delphi type survey methods are effective as a means of obtaining opinions from a wide number of relevant experts identifying potential priority topic areas where there is a need for research evidence. Opinions may be sought at local and national levels in order to inform national research priorities.

Developing an Environmental Public Health Surveillance System for England

Introduction: The preventable environmental burden of disease estimated for the UK is 14%. To support primary prevention of non-communicable disease, robust information leading to actions that reduce environmental hazard exposures is required, that could support an environmental public health service and a Health in All Policies approach. In England, no comprehensive population-based surveillance exists that integrates environmental hazard and health information. Public Health England (PHE) decided to develop an Environmental Public Health Surveillance System (EPHSS), with a first phase to build capabilities for surveillance of acute incidents, and a second phase to extend to datasets relevant to chronic exposures. Methods: A governance system was established with representation across PHE groups. EPHSS development started from consultation of stakeholders in public health service, government, academia and NGOs. In 2014 user requirements were identified for phase one leading to development of software as a web-based system capturing information on environmental events and exposures of interest to public health and to be shared across contributing agencies. In 2015, 106 stakeholders were consulted for phase two, and user priorities and requirements related to chronic exposure were documented, with related software development expected for 2017-18. Results: EPHSS software for Phase one is expected to be completed in 2016, several topics were identified of interest to specific users, who are expected to pilot applications of acute incident information surveillance on topics including poisonings, housing-related chemical hazards, and exposures from waste sites. Phase two stakeholder consultation highlighted several priority topic areas. Conclusions: EPHSS has developed a tool expected to lead to improved intelligence across a range of sectors and thus support public health practitioners aiming to prevent acute and chronic exposures and related health effects.