ArticleJournal of global health2016
Approaches, tools and methods used for setting priorities in health research in the 21(st) century.
Article in Journal of global health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 109 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
109 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Exploring evidence gaps in clinical trials in thermal burns care: an umbrella review.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Comparing international dementia research priorities-Systematic review.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review to identify research priority setting in Black and minority ethnic health and evaluate their processes.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Priorities of patients, caregivers and health-care professionals for health research - A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Pooled it
- Cancer early detection research priorities in some underrepresented communities: a commentary of the learnings from a community priority setting project.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Methodological review: Prioritizing a future research agenda for overcoming immunization implementation barriers in Pakistan.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- A methodological framework for establishing regional disease-specific health research priorities (the RDHRP Framework).Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Setting research priorities to understand and address the impact of climate change on the health of women and children in low-income and middle-income countries using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method.The Lancet. Global health · 2026Review
- Editor's view: What makes a scientist successful?Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Reducing the burden of osteoarthritis in Australia: A 2024-2025 research priority-setting study.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2026Article
- A research agenda for digital payments of health workers in large-scale health campaigns in sub-Saharan Africa.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Research and Learning Priorities for a Surgical Obstetrics and Family Planning Project Implementing in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Results of an Expert Consultation.Global health, science and practice · 2025Article
- Ideometrics: a scientific approach to generating, evaluating, and prioritising ideas.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Setting research priorities for cancer in India: Findings from a CHNRI exercise by ICMR & AIIMS-NCI.The Indian journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Research priorities for physical activity and exercise management of people with knee and hip osteoarthritis: A multi-stage international priority-setting study from the OARSI Rehabilitation Discussion Group.Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2025Article
- Two decades of the CHNRI method (2006-2025): Tracking its evolution and contribution to the emerging field of ideometrics.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Optimizing Research Impact: A Toolkit for Stakeholder-Driven Prioritization of Systematic Review Topics.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025Article
- The state of cancer research and its association with the cancer burden in Ecuador: a bibliometric study.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Setting stakeholder-led research priorities for advancing Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in Bangladesh using CHNRI method: an icddr,b initiative.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Editor's view: Value of information in the 21st century - examples from science, medicine, policy, media, and markets.Journal of global health · 2025Article
49 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth research is difficult to prioritize, because the number of possible competing ideas for research is large, the outcome of research is inherently uncertain, and the impact of research is difficult to predict and measure. A systematic and transparent process to assist policy makers and research funding agencies in making investment decisions is a permanent need.
methodsTo obtain a better understanding of the landscape of approaches, tools and methods used to prioritize health research, I conducted a methodical review using the PubMed database for the period 2001-2014.
resultsA total of 165 relevant studies were identified, in which health research prioritization was conducted. They most frequently used the CHNRI method (26%), followed by the Delphi method (24%), James Lind Alliance method (8%), the Combined Approach Matrix (CAM) method (2%) and the Essential National Health Research method (<1%). About 3% of studies reported no clear process and provided very little information on how priorities were set. A further 19% used a combination of expert panel interview and focus group discussion ("consultation process") but provided few details, while a further 2% used approaches that were clearly described, but not established as a replicable method. Online surveys that were not accompanied by face-to-face meetings were used in 8% of studies, while 9% used a combination of literature review and questionnaire to scrutinise the research options for prioritization among the participating experts.
conclusionThe number of priority setting exercises in health research published in PubMed-indexed journals is increasing, especially since 2010. These exercises are being conducted at a variety of levels, ranging from the global level to the level of an individual hospital. With the development of new tools and methods which have a well-defined structure - such as the CHNRI method, James Lind Alliance Method and Combined Approach Matrix - it is likely that the Delphi method and non-replicable consultation processes will gradually be replaced by these emerging tools, which offer more transparency and replicability. It is too early to say whether any single method can address the needs of most exercises conducted at different levels, or if better results may perhaps be achieved through combination of components of several methods.
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.