ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2021
Involving stakeholders in research priority setting: a scoping review.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 2 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
62 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Developing a prioritized research agenda for necrotizing enterocolitis.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Pooled it
- 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
- 'It Got Me Thinking About My Home Environment but Was Also Great Fun': Using Experiential Methods in Public Involvement Workshops on Indoor Air Pollution in Later Life.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Mapping stakeholders for developing cancer research in Small Island Developing States: a descriptive study from the Eastern Caribbean.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Evidence Map of Cochrane Reviews on Nutrition and Physical Activity in Healthy and At-Risk Populations: A Scoping Review.Journal of prevention (2022) · 2026Review
- A continuity of midwifery care research mission, vision and agenda.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Methodological review: Prioritizing a future research agenda for overcoming immunization implementation barriers in Pakistan.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Interest-Holder Engagement in Health Guideline Development: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- Global Insights on the Involvement of Ethnic Minority Populations in Health and Social Care Research Priority Setting: A Systematic Scoping Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- Community and stakeholder engagement in national priority setting and participatory research for HIV, Tuberculosis, and Malaria programs in Nepal.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Community engagement in the creation of a novel dietary intervention for high school athletes: methods to include teen athletes and coaches in feasible ways.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Scoping review on the prioritisation of high-consequence infectious pathogens for research preparedness and response to health emergencies.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Approaches for community intervention and research priority setting to reduce health inequalities: a scoping review.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Enhancing System Empathy Within a UK Emergency Department: A Feasibility Interprofessional Priority Setting Exercise.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Reducing the burden of osteoarthritis in Australia: A 2024-2025 research priority-setting study.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2026Article
- Enablers of Post-Validation Surveillance for Lymphatic Filariasis in the Pacific Islands: A Nominal Group Technique and Expert Elicitation.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
- Improving prehospital and emergency care for patients with mental dysregulation: a comprehensive research agenda.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring variation in research priorities generated by AI tools.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Research priorities for back pain: Results from an adapted James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership.PloS one · 2026Article
- Research priority setting for unpaid carers of older adults, patients with palliative care needs and at the end of life in Australia.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Article
2 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis scoping review provides a thorough analysis of how stakeholders have so far been involved in research priority setting. The review describes, synthesizes, and evaluates research priority setting projects not only for the field of health-as previous reviews have done-but does so on a much broader scale for any research area.
methodsA comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Reflecting the importance of grey literature, Google Scholar and relevant websites were also screened for eligible publications. A computational approach was then used for the study selection. The final screening for inclusion was done manually.
resultsThe scoping review encompasses 731 research priority setting projects published until the end of 2020. Overall, the projects were conducted within the realm of 50 subject areas ranging from agriculture and environment over health to social work and technology. Key learnings include that nearly all priority setting projects aimed to identify research priorities for the field of health (93%), particularly for nursing and care, cancer, pediatrics, and mental, behavioral and neurodevelopmental disorders. Only 6% of the projects were not health-related and 1% identified research priorities at the interface between health and a non-health area. Over time, 30 different stakeholder groups took part in research priority setting. The stakeholders most frequently asked to identify research priorities were doctors, patients, academics/researchers, nurses, allied healthcare professionals, family members, friends, and carers. Nearly two thirds of all projects have been conducted in Europe and North America. Overall, only 9% of the projects emphasized the importance of stakeholders in their goals and rationales and actively involved them. In around a quarter of the projects, stakeholders deliberated on their research priorities throughout the entire process.
conclusionBy mapping out the complex landscape of stakeholder involvement in research priority setting, this review guides future efforts to involve stakeholders effectively, inclusively, and transparently, which in turn may increase the overall value of research for society. As a practical addition to this review, the first worldwide research priority setting database was created: https://ois.lbg.ac.at/en/project-database . The database contains all the projects analyzed for this review and is constantly updated with the latest published research priority setting projects.
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.