Health research priority setting processes assist researchers and policymakers in effectively targeting research that has the greatest potential public health benefit. Many different approaches to health research prioritization exist, but there is no agreement on what might constitute best practice. Moreover, because of the many different contexts for which priorities can be set, attempting to produce one best practice is in fact not appropriate, as the optimal approach varies per exercise. Therefore, following a literature review and an analysis of health research priority setting exercises that were organized or coordinated by the World Health Organization since 2005, we propose a checklist for health research priority setting that allows for informed choices on different approaches and outlines nine common themes of good practice. It is intended to provide generic assistance for planning health research prioritization processes. The checklist explains what needs to be clarified in order to establish the context for which priorities are set; it reviews available approaches to health research priority setting; it offers discussions on stakeholder participation and information gathering; it sets out options for use of criteria and different methods for deciding upon priorities; and it emphasizes the importance of well-planned implementation, evaluation and transparency.

No abstract

Robert Terry and colleagues present working definitions of operational research, implementation research, and health systems research within the context of research to strengthen health systems.

In 2005, all member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) made a commitment to achieve that goal. T e commitment was reaf rmed in 2012 through a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly (www.un.org/en/ga/67/resolutions.shtml) promoting universal health coverage, including comprehensive primary health care, social protection, and sustainable f nancing. T e 2012 resolution highlights the importance of universal health coverage in reaching the Millennium Development Goals, in alleviating poverty, and in achieving sustainable development. It recognizes that health depends not only on having access to medical services and a means of paying for these services but also on understanding the links between social factors, the environment, natural disasters, and health. Universal health coverage is central to the question of how health should be represented in the new development agenda that will succeed the Millennium Development Goals in 2015. Despite the multinational commitment to achieving universal health coverage, it remains unclear exactly how the two principal components-access to high-quality health services and f nancial risk protection-can be provided to all people in all settings. For instance, despite the existence of af ordable and safe antiretroviral treatments for HIV/AIDS, there are many obstacles to negotiate before getting these treatments to the 5 million HIV-positive people who need them. Likewise, a variety of approaches to health f nancing have been tried and tested, but there are still no guaranteed remedies for the catastrophic health payments incurred by 150 million people worldwide each year. Making the commitment to universal health coverage raises big questions. A scientif c research agenda is needed to provide the answers. T is agenda is the subject of WHO's 2013 World Health Report, Research for Universal Health Coverage, released on 15 August (www.who.int/whr/en/index.html). T e report argues that a wide variety of welldesigned research studies-ranging from clinical investigations to health policy and systems research-is needed to show how to provide services for prevention, cure, and care. T e f ndings of each new research study have the potential to yield products and processes that improve access to health services, taking a further step toward universal health coverage. T e report also describes how to create an environment that stimulates research and innovation. T e case for investing in research is most compelling when the results have the potential to make health services more accessible and af ordable, with measurable benef ts for health. T e 2013 World Health Report gives a series of examples of the power of research to enact change, as a stimulus to scientists, and as a reminder to policy-makers. In one example, a systematic review of survey data from 22 African countries showed that household ownership of at least one insecticide-treated mosquito net was associated with a 13 to 31% reduction in the mortality of children under 5 years of age (1). T ese f ndings un...