Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39267175›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Needs led research: ensuring relevant research in two PhD projects within maternity care.

Kristin Jerve Aanstad, Kjersti Engen Marsdal, Ellen Blix, Anne Kaasen, Mirjam Lukasse, Ingvil Krarup Sørbye, Ida Svege

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Kristin Jerve Aanstad *Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 32, Oslo, 0167, Norway.
Kjersti Engen Marsdal *Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 32, Oslo, 0167, Norway. kmarsdal@oslomet.no.
Ellen BlixFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 32, Oslo, 0167, Norway.
Anne KaasenFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 32, Oslo, 0167, Norway.
Mirjam LukasseFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 32, Oslo, 0167, Norway.
Ingvil Krarup SørbyeDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Ida SvegeFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Pilestredet 32, Oslo, 0167, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been a growing concern regarding research waste and the mismatch between conducted research and the research needs of knowledge users. The Needs Led Research (NLR) approach is proposed as an effective method to ensure that research address actual evidence gaps that are relevant to the users of the knowledge. By search and reviewing literature and involving knowledge users, NLR aims to identify, verify, and prioritize research needs. This paper describes and compares the implementation of the NLR approach in two separate PhD projects within maternity care, and addresses the challenges encountered throughout the processes, aiming to offer valuable insights for future NLR initiatives.

methodsThe NLR processes consisted of four phases: (1) defining the scope (2) identifying and verifying research needs (3) prioritizing research needs and (4) designing the PhD projects. Literature searches were conducted during Phase 2, while knowledge user involvement took place in Phases 2 and 3. The knowledge user involvement, at a co-thinker and advocatory level, included knowledge user groups and surveys. Project groups, who were responsible for all decision-making, conducted Phases 1 and 4. The scopes of the PhD projects were labor induction (NLR-LINO) and fetal monitoring in low-risk deliveries (NLR-LISTEN).

resultsIn NLR-LINO, 17 research needs were identified and verified as actual evidence gaps relevant for the knowledge users. Among these, ten were rated as "very important" by a majority of the 322 survey respondents. The aim of the PhD LINO project was defined as "To investigate whether outpatient induction of labor is beneficial in a Norwegian setting." In NLR-LISTEN, seven research needs were identified and verified as actual evidence gaps relevant for the knowledge users. These were prioritized by 466 survey respondents, and the aim of the PhD LISTEN project was defined as "To investigate the methods used for fetal monitoring in low-risk deliveries in Norway and evaluate adherence to evidence-based practice while also exploring potential reasons for any deviations."

conclusionsThis paper shows that the NLR is a viable approach for prioritizing research. The findings highlight the impact of the initial scope on subsequent phases and emphasize the importance of pragmatic decision-making throughout the process. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that NLR requires dedicated resources, and if integrated into PhD projects, additional time and training should be allocated accordingly.

Indexed as

Knowledge user involvementMaternity careNeeds led researchPriority setting

Identifiers

PMID39267175
PMCPMC11391717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.