Top research priorities for preterm birth: results of a prioritisation partnership between people affected by preterm birth and healthcare professionals
Top research priorities for preterm birth: results of a prioritisation partnership between people affected by preterm birth and healthcare professionals
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12884-019-2654-3
复制
发表时间：
2019-12-30
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Deshpande, Sanjeev
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Oliver, Sandy;Uhm, Seilin;Deshpande, Sanjeev
背景资料：我们报告了一个过程，以确定和优先考虑早产的研究问题是最重要的人受早产和保健医生在英国和爱尔兰共和国。方法：使用由James Lind联盟建立的共识发展方法，使用在线调查，在NHS早产诊所和新生儿病房分发的纸质调查，并通过检索已发表的系统评价和指南。这些问题的优先顺序是通过在线投票，在相同的NHS诊所和单位的纸质副本，其次是决策研讨会的人受早产和医疗保健professionals.Results：总体26个组织参加。386人对调查做出了回应，636篇系统评价和12篇临床指南被检查以获得研究建议。由此，整理了122个关于治疗效果的不确定性的列表：70个来自调查，28个来自系统评价，24个来自指南。在删除了18个重复的问题后，剩下的104个问题进入了公众在线投票的前10名。507人参加了投票; 231人（45%）受早产影响，216人（43%）是卫生专业人员，55人（11%）受早产影响也是卫生专业人员。虽然各类选民的优先次序是相同的，但其他问题的排列方式则有所不同。经督导小组审阅后，最优先的30个问题随后被带到优先次序工作坊。前15个问题的列表达成一致，但有一些明显的差异，在受早产和医疗专业人员之间的优先级的人。结论：这些研究问题优先考虑的服务用户和医疗专业人员之间的合作伙伴关系的过程中，应告知那些计划资助研究的决定。受早产影响的人群的优先事项有时与医疗保健专业人员的优先事项不同，未来的优先事项设定伙伴关系应考虑单独报告这些事项，以及总体报告。
Background: We report a process to identify and prioritise research questions in preterm birth that are most important to people affected by preterm birth and healthcare practitioners in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.Methods: Using consensus development methods established by the James Lind Alliance, unanswered research questions were identified using an online survey, a paper survey distributed in NHS preterm birth clinics and neonatal units, and through searching published systematic reviews and guidelines. Prioritisation of these questions was by online voting, with paper copies at the same NHS clinics and units, followed by a decision-making workshop of people affected by preterm birth and healthcare professionals.Results: Overall 26 organisations participated. Three hundred and eighty six people responded to the survey, and 636 systematic reviews and 12 clinical guidelines were inspected for research recommendations. From this, a list of 122 uncertainties about the effects of treatment was collated: 70 from the survey, 28 from systematic reviews, and 24 from guidelines. After removing 18 duplicates, the 104 remaining questions went to a public online vote on the top 10. Five hundred and seven people voted; 231 (45%) people affected by preterm birth, 216 (43%) health professionals, and 55 (11%) affected by preterm birth who were also a health professional. Although the top priority was the same for all types of voter, there was variation in how other questions were ranked.Following review by the Steering Group, the top 30 questions were then taken to the prioritisation workshop. A list of top 15 questions was agreed, but with some clear differences in priorities between people affected by preterm birth and healthcare professionals.Conclusions: These research questions prioritised by a partnership process between service users and healthcare professionals should inform the decisions of those who plan to fund research. Priorities of people affected by preterm birth were sometimes different from those of healthcare professionals, and future priority setting partnerships should consider reporting these separately, as well as in total.