ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022
Feasibility of a best-worst scaling exercise to set priorities for autism research.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Engagement to Identify Health Priorities of People With Intellectual and/or Developmental Disability.OTJR : occupation, participation and health · 2026Article
- Application of nanoultrasonography in early diagnosis of coronary heart disease.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025Review
- Feasibility of a best-worst scaling exercise to set priorities for autism research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe preferences of autism stakeholders regarding the top priorities for future autism research are largely unknown.
objectiveThis study had two objectives: First, to examine what autism stakeholders think new research investments should be and the attributes of investment that they consider important, and second, to explore the feasibility, acceptability and outcomes of two prioritization exercises among autism stakeholders regarding their priorities for future research in autism.
designThis was a prospective stakeholder-engaged iterative study consisting of best-worst scaling (BWS) and direct prioritization exercise. SETTING AND
participantsA national snowball sample of 219 stakeholders was included: adults with autism, caregivers, service providers and researchers.
main outcome measuresThe main outcomes measures were attributes that participants value in future research investments, and priority research investments for future research.
resultsTwo hundred and nineteen participants completed the exercises, of whom 11% were adults with autism, 58% were parents/family members, 37% were service providers and 21% were researchers. Among stakeholders, the BWS exercises were easier to understand than the direct prioritization, less frequently skipped and yielded more consistent results. The proportion of children with autism affected by the research was the most important attribute for all types of stakeholders. The top three priorities among future research investments were (1) evidence on which child, family and intervention characteristics lead to the best/worst outcomes; (2) evidence on how changes in one area of a child's life are related to changes in other areas; and (3) evidence on dietary interventions. Priorities were similar for all stakeholder types.
conclusionsThe values and priorities examined here provide a road map for investigators and funders to pursue autism research that matters to stakeholders. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Stakeholders completed a BWS and direct prioritization exercise to inform us about their priorities for future autism 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.