Engaging Patients and Clinicians in Establishing Research Priorities for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

Rees, Sandra; Chadha, Rati; Donovan, Lois; Guitard, Adrienne L.T.; Koppula, Sudha; Laupacis, Andreas; Simpson, Sara; Johnson, Jeffrey

doi:10.1016/j.jcjd.2016.08.219

Cited by 28 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seven research priority setting studies were identified. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] An additional four research priority setting studies were identified in the James Lind Alliance database. [15][16][17][18] A further research priority setting study was identified through personal communication with the clinical lead.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19,20 Eight completed and four progressing research priority setting studies were included (Tables 1 and S1). [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] The PSP for infertility has established the top ten research uncertainties for male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organisation of care, in a single initiative. 21 Four research priority setting studies have reported their full results in a peerreviewed publication.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research priority setting in women’s health: a systematic review

Graham

Showell

Vercoe

et al. 2020

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Developing a shared agenda is an important step in ensuring future research has the necessary relevance. Objective To characterise research priority setting partnerships (PSPs) relevant to women’s health. Search strategy Included studies were identified by searching MEDLINE and the James Lind Alliance (JLA) database. Selection criteria Priority setting partnerships using formal consensus methods. Data collection and analysis Descriptive narrative to describe the study characteristics, methods, and results. Main results Ten national and two international PSPs were identified. All PSPs used the JLA method to identify research priorities. Nine PSPs had published a protocol. Potential research uncertainties were gathered from guidelines (two studies), Cochrane reviews (five studies), and surveys (12 studies). The number of healthcare professionals (31–287), patients (44–932), and others (33–139) who responded to the survey, and the number of uncertainties submitted (52–4767) varied. All PSPs entered confirmed research uncertainties (39–104) into interim priority setting surveys and healthcare professionals (31–287), patients (44–932), and others (33–139) responded. All PSPs entered a short list of research uncertainties into a consensus development meeting, which enabled healthcare professionals (six to 21), patients (eight to 14), and others (two to 13) to identify research priorities (ten to 15). Four PSPs have published their results. Conclusion Future research priority setting studies should publish a protocol, use formal consensus development methods, and ensure their methods and results are comprehensively reported. Tweetable abstract Research published in @BJOGtweets highlights future research priorities across women’s health, including @FertilityTop10, @jamesmnduffy.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research priority setting in women’s health: a systematic review

Graham

Showell

Vercoe

et al. 2020

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The CAR PSP survey response numbers were similar to other PSPs in Canada and to the NIAA PSP. 32,33 (Canadian population of 37 million, approximately 3,300 anesthesiologists; UK population 61 million, approximately 11,000 anesthesiologists, NIAA PSP reported 623 respondents and 1,420 suggestions.) 13,25,34,35 The CAR PSP captured responses from individuals from all provinces, with a range of ages, and with a good balance of gender identity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Top ten priorities for anesthesia and perioperative research: a report from the Canadian Anesthesia Research Priority Setting Partnership

McKeen

Banfield

McIsaac

et al. 2020

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the Canadian Anesthesia Research Priority Setting Partnership (CAR PSP) was to identify a top ten list of shared priorities for research in anesthesia and perioperative care in Canada. Methods We used the methods of the James Lind Alliance to involve patients, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and researchers in determining the research priorities in Canada. In a first survey, participants submitted questions that they want research to answer about anesthesia and perioperative care. We summarized those responses into a longlist of questions. We reviewed the literature to see if any of those questions were already answered. In a second survey, participants chose up to ten questions from the This article is accompanied by an editorial. Please see Can J Anesth 2020; 67: this issue.

show abstract

“…26 The present study helps illustrate outcomes of meaningful patient and researcher engagement, building on other such work in Canada. 20,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] It also contributes to the growth of evidence that people with lived experience are valuable research partners.…”

Section: Openmentioning

confidence: 95%

The top research questions asked by people with lived depression experience in Alberta: a survey

Breault

Rittenbach

Hartle

et al. 2018

cmajo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

epression is a major public health issue in Canada. 1 About 8% of adults aged 25-64 years are projected to experience major depression at some time in their lives. 2 Depression is estimated to account for at least $32.3 billion of direct and indirect costs to this nation annually. 3 Continued investment in research that explores prevention and treatment is needed, 4,5 in particular through engaging patients (i.e., people with depression, family members and informal caretakers) in this endeavour to better ensure that research is relevant to their needs. Patient engagement occurs "when patients meaningfully and actively collaborate in the governance, priority setting, and conduct of research, as well as in summarizing, distributing, sharing, and applying its resulting knowledge." 6 However, research findings suggest that medical research topics are selected predominantly by researchers and funding agencies, with little input from patients themselves, 7 and that, even when patients are engaged in setting research priorities, their opinions are sometimes overlooked. 8 Engaging people with lived experience of a health situation in setting research priorities is one structured way of influencing researchers and research funders to consider their opinions.

show abstract

Engaging Patients and Clinicians in Establishing Research Priorities for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

Cited by 28 publications

References 16 publications

Research priority setting in women’s health: a systematic review

Research priority setting in women’s health: a systematic review

Top ten priorities for anesthesia and perioperative research: a report from the Canadian Anesthesia Research Priority Setting Partnership

The top research questions asked by people with lived depression experience in Alberta: a survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About