ArticleBMC health services research2009
Identifying research priorities for health care priority setting: a collaborative effort between managers and researchers.
Article in BMC health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 'Real-world' health care priority setting using explicit decision criteria: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2015Pooled it
- Department managers' perceptions of a priority-setting model in a local healthcare organisation: a mixed-methods study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Establishing Research Priorities for Children Living With Chronic Health Conditions: A Value-Weighting Study by Australian Caregivers.Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025Article
- Enablers and barriers for policymaker engagement in health research from the perspective of policymakers: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Priority setting to support a public health research agenda: a modified Delphi study with public health stakeholders in Germany.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- The relationship between chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus and health-related quality of life: a systematic review.Clinical kidney journal · 2022Article
- Nurse-identified patient care and health services research priorities in the United Arab Emirates: a Delphi study.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 11: reporting outcomes of an evidence-driven approach to disinvestment in a local healthcare setting.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Review
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 9: conceptualising disinvestment in the local healthcare setting.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 10: operationalising disinvestment in a conceptual framework for resource allocation.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in a local healthcare setting.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 2: identifying opportunities for disinvestment in a local healthcare setting.BMC health services research · 2017Review
- Adapting the nominal group technique for priority setting of evidence-practice gaps in implementation science.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- 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.Health research policy and systems · 2016Article
- Prioritizing research needs based on a systematic evidence review: a pilot process for engaging stakeholders.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2013Article
- What comparative effectiveness research is needed? A framework for using guidelines and systematic reviews to identify evidence gaps and research priorities.Annals of internal medicine · 2012Article
- A checklist for health research priority setting: nine common themes of good practice.Health research policy and systems · 2010Article
- "We can move forward": challenging historical inequity in public health research in Solomon Islands.International journal for equity in health · 2010Article
- Reorienting programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) towards disinvestment.BMC health services research · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo date there has been relatively little published about how research priorities are set, and even less about methods by which decision-makers can be engaged in defining a relevant and appropriate research agenda. We report on a recent effort in British Columbia to have researchers and decision-makers jointly establish an agenda for future research into questions of resource allocation.
methodsThe researchers enlisted decision-maker partners from each of British Columbia's six health authorities. Three forums were held, at which researchers and decision-makers from various levels in the health authorities considered possible research areas related to three key focus areas: (1) generation and use of decision criteria and measurement of 'benefit' against such criteria; (2) identification of so-called 'disinvestment' opportunities; and (3) evaluation of the effectiveness of priority setting procedures. Detailed notes were taken from each forum and synthesized into a set of qualitative themes.
resultsForum participants suggested that future research into healthcare priority setting would benefit from studies that were longitudinal, comparative, and/or interdisciplinary. As well, participants identified two broad theme areas in which specific research projects were deemed desirable. First, future research might usefully consider how formal priority setting and resource allocation projects are situated within a larger organizational and political context. Second, additional research efforts should be devoted to better understanding and improving the actual implementation of priority setting frameworks, particularly with respect to issues of change management and the resolution of impediments to action on recommendations for resource allocation.
conclusionWe were able to validate the importance of initial areas posed to the group and observed emergence of additional concerns and directions of critical importance to these decision-makers at this time. It is likely that the results are broadly applicable to other healthcare contexts. The implementation of this research agenda in British Columbia will depend upon the ability of the researchers and decision-makers to develop particular projects that fit within the constraints of existing funding opportunities. The process of engagement itself had benefits in terms of connecting decision-makers with their peers and sparking increased interest in the use and refinement of priority setting frameworks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.