Background: Priority-setting is a complicated and time-consuming process; however, if appropriately conducted, it could efficiently divert resources to the most important studies. A considerable body of evidence indicates that priority-setting measures in health research taken so far in Iran have not satisfied decision-makers, policy-makers, funders, communities, or even researchers. This study was designed to explore the flaws of these measures and their deciding factors.
Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 key participants and used a thematic data-analysis approach to analyse verbatim transcripts and documents. Our interviewees, who were skilful at conducting health research and worked as managers at different levels of the health system, were selected using a purposeful sampling. We asked about their experiences of priority-setting in health and relevant challenges and asked for recommendations. These semi-structured interviews were taped, transcribed and analysed in terms of content and themes using the MAXQDA10 qualitative data-analysis software.
Results: With regard to priority-setting facilitators and barriers, four themes were extracted, namely managerial factors, structural factors, motivational factors, and process factors. Managers' commitment, consideration of intellectual property, compliance with superordinate rules, and provision of a definition of reliable criteria were among the facilitators. The rapid turnover of managers, inefficiency of criteria for faculty promotion, and disregard of appeal mechanisms were examples of the barriers.
Conclusion: It is important to consider appropriate regulations and motivations to provide research priorities and divert scarce resources to them. In addition, it is necessary to improve the knowledge and skills of researchers and research administration offices on priority-setting methods, thereby enhancing priority-oriented research projects.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6027571 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-018-0313-1 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
A New Way Forward for Women's Health Research at the National Institutes of Health: A Roadmap From the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Consensus Report.
Obstet Gynecol
January 2025
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, Utah; the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Warren Alpert Medical School at Brown University, and Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, Rhode Island; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and Baker Donelson, Washington, DC; KFF, San Francisco, California; and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke Cancer Institute, Duke School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. All authors served on the National Academies Committee as committee members or employees of the National Academies.
Despite efforts to address inequities, research on women's health conditions (defined as those that uniquely or differently affect women and female individuals) remain significantly understudied. As directed by Congress, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Research on Women's Health requested the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (National Academies) to conduct an assessment of the state of women's health research at the NIH. The findings of the National Academies committee include: 1) a significant funding inequity, with less than 8% of the total NIH grant budget for fiscal year 2023 allocated to women's health research; 2) a need for improved strategic NIH-wide priority setting, oversight, and adherence to existing policies to support women's health research; 3) a need for a specific institute for research on conditions specific to women's health; and 4) a need for sufficient training and additional funding to grow and retain the women's health research workforce.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPriority Setting Partnership on Placental Pathology: Consensus recommendations for placental research.
Placenta
December 2024
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address:
Introduction: The placenta supports the metabolic and respiratory requirements of the fetus. Placental disorders, caused by various pathophysiological mechanisms, may result in adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. Knowledge gaps remain in the understanding, reporting and interpretation of placental pathology relating to clinical conditions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFGood Practices for Health Technology Assessment Guideline Development: A Report of the Health Technology Assessment International, HTAsiaLink, and ISPOR Special Task Force.
Value Health
October 2024
Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand; Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Objectives: Health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines are intended to support successful implementation of HTA by enhancing consistency and transparency in concepts, methods, process, and use, thereby enhancing the legitimacy of the decision-making process. This report lays out good practices and practical recommendations for developing or updating HTA guidelines to ensure successful implementation.
Methods: The task force was established in 2022 and comprised experts and academics from various geographical regions, each with substantial experience in developing HTA guidelines for national health policymaking.
Good Practices for Health Technology Assessment Guideline Development: A Report of the Health Technology Assessment International, HTAsiaLink, and ISPOR Special Task Force.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care
January 2025
Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Objectives: Health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines are intended to support the successful implementation of HTA by enhancing consistency and transparency in concepts, methods, processes, and use, thereby enhancing the legitimacy of the decision-making process. This report lays out good practices and practical recommendations for developing or updating HTA guidelines to ensure successful implementation.
Methods: The task force was established in 2022 and comprised experts and academics from various geographical regions, each with substantial experience in developing HTA guidelines for national health policy making.
Changing the trajectories of mental health difficulties in Norfolk and Suffolk: a research-priority-setting project with patients, the public, clinicians, policymakers and other stakeholders-study protocol.
BMJ Open
January 2025
School of Psychology, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Introduction: Mental health problems are the most significant cause of disability and have high annual economic costs; hence, they are a priority for the government, service providers and policymakers. Consisting of largely coastal and rural communities, the populations of Norfolk and Suffolk, UK, have elevated burdens of mental health problems, areas with high levels of deprivation and an increasing migrant population. However, these communities are underserved by research and areas with the greatest mental health needs are not represented or engaged in research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!