ArticleJournal of global health2016
Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method: IV. Key conceptual advances.
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 70 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
70 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodological procedures for priority setting mental health research: a systematic review summarising the methods, designs and frameworks involved with priority setting.Health research policy and systems · 2023Pooled it
- A methodological framework for establishing regional disease-specific health research priorities (the RDHRP Framework).Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Prioritising communicable disease research in Afghanistan: an application of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology.BMJ global health · 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
- Research priorities for improved pandemic and epidemic intelligence.The Lancet. Global health · 2026Review
- Priority implementation research for measles-rubella microarray patches identified using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- A WHO global research priority agenda for wasting and nutritional oedema in infants and children under 5 years.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- A research agenda for digital payments of health workers in large-scale health campaigns in sub-Saharan Africa.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Identifying research priorities for gestational weight gain in India: A national exercise.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Exploring variation in research priorities generated by AI tools.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Identifying local priorities for research with linked routine data: an online workshop method.International journal of population data science · 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 sexual and reproductive health in humanitarian settings: a global, stakeholder-informed agenda.Conflict and health · 2025Article
- WHO global research priorities for traditional, complementary, and integrative (TCI) medicine: an international consensus and comparisons with LLMs.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- How to distinguish promotion, prevention, and treatment trials in public mental health: development and validation of the VErona-LUgano Tool (VELUT).Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2025Article
- Research priorities on physical-mental comorbidity in children and adolescents: an international consensus.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
- Setting research priorities for cancer in India: Findings from a CHNRI exercise by ICMR & AIIMS-NCI.The Indian journal of medical research · 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
- Setting research priorities for maternal, newborn and child health, sexual and reproductive health and nutrition in Afghanistan: an application of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology.BMJ global health · 2025Article
10 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChild Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) started as an initiative of the Global Forum for Health Research in Geneva, Switzerland. Its aim was to develop a method that could assist priority setting in health research investments. The first version of the CHNRI method was published in 2007-2008. The aim of this paper was to summarize the history of the development of the CHNRI method and its key conceptual advances.
methodsThe guiding principle of the CHNRI method is to expose the potential of many competing health research ideas to reduce disease burden and inequities that exist in the population in a feasible and cost-effective way.
resultsThe CHNRI method introduced three key conceptual advances that led to its increased popularity in comparison to other priority-setting methods and processes. First, it proposed a systematic approach to listing a large number of possible research ideas, using the "4D" framework (description, delivery, development and discovery research) and a well-defined "depth" of proposed research ideas (research instruments, avenues, options and questions). Second, it proposed a systematic approach for discriminating between many proposed research ideas based on a well-defined context and criteria. The five "standard" components of the context are the population of interest, the disease burden of interest, geographic limits, time scale and the preferred style of investing with respect to risk. The five "standard" criteria proposed for prioritization between research ideas are answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, maximum potential for disease burden reduction and the effect on equity. However, both the context and the criteria can be flexibly changed to meet the specific needs of each priority-setting exercise. Third, it facilitated consensus development through measuring collective optimism on each component of each research idea among a larger group of experts using a simple scoring system. This enabled the use of the knowledge of many experts in the field, "visualising" their collective opinion and presenting the list of many research ideas with their ranks, based on an intuitive score that ranges between 0 and 100.
conclusionsTwo recent reviews showed that the CHNRI method, an approach essentially based on "crowdsourcing", has become the dominant approach to setting health research priorities in the global biomedical literature over the past decade. With more than 50 published examples of implementation to date, it is now widely used in many international organisations for collective decision-making on health research priorities. The applications have been helpful in promoting better balance between investments in fundamental research, translation research and implementation research.
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.