SynthesisOrphanet journal of rare diseases2023
Prioritization of research engaged with rare disease stakeholders: a systematic review and thematic analysis.
Synthesis in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patients' and Providers' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Health Record Use in Deep Phenotyping and Rare-Disease Screening: An Empty Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Integrating Equity in Topic Selection for Orphan Medicinal Products: Policy Implications for Health Technology Assessment in Rare Diseases.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Mapping the rare disease stakeholders in India.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Descriptive epidemiology demonstrating the All of Us database as a versatile resource for the rare and undiagnosed disease community.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- The role of public health in rare diseases: hemophilia as an example.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
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
backgroundAlthough rare diseases (RD) are increasingly becoming a priority for healthcare activities and services around the world, developing research policy for investigating RD in public settings proves challenging due to the limited nature of existing evidence. Rare conditions require the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders in order to promote general awareness and garner political support. Consequently, it is critically important to identify trends in the various types of research focusing on rare disease stakeholders, including the specific topics or issues to be included in surveys and studies focused on RD stakeholders. This systematic review and thematic analysis analyses the existing literature based on RD surveys, including the stakeholders involved, and proposes potential research priorities and initiatives for policy-making related to RD.
methodsArticles were downloaded and analyzed from across five electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and CINHAL) and 115 studies were included.
resultsAcross 115 studies, the main research participants were patients and/or caregivers (n = 77, 67.0%), health professionals (n = 18, 15.7%), and the public (n = 7, 6.1%). The studies discussed RDs in general (n = 46, 40.0%), endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases (n = 20, 17.4%) and other RDs. Experiences with RD were examined by more than half of the selected studies (n = 74, 64.3%), followed by the opinions of stakeholders (n = 24, 20.9%). Most of the studies used surveys in order to collect relevant data (n = 114, 99.1%). Additionally, the majority of the studies were conducted in high-income countries (n = 92, 80.0%) and rarely in middle and low-income countries (n = 12, 13.8%).
conclusionStakeholder research on RD reveals that there are significant instances of unmet needs and various challenges faced by the medical system in dealing with RDs. Furthermore, public awareness and support is critical to ensuring political feasibility of increasing national-level investments for RDs and development of medical products and treatment.
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.