Stakeholder Engagement in Planning the Design of a National Needs
                        Assessment for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Management in
                        Nepal

Archana, Shrestha; Maharjan, R; Vaidya, Abhinav; Dhimal, Meghnath; Oli, Natalia; Shrestha, Rajeev; Pyakurel, Pradeep Kumar; Annette, Fitzpatrick; Citrin, David; Bajracharya, Swornim; Xu, Dong Roman; Spiegelman, Donna; Koju, Rajendra

doi:10.1016/j.gheart.2019.05.002

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We engaged a wide range of stakeholders from different sectors of CVD care within the 7Ps framework [ 14 ] (Patients and the Public, Providers, Purchasers, Payers, Public Policy makers and Policy advocates, Product Makers, and the Principal Investigators) in various steps of the needs assessment. At our first stakeholders meeting, we explained our plan, discussed our protocol and received recommendations on improving research methods and design [ 15 ], which we implemented in our final protocol before data collection. After completing the first phase of data analysis, we conducted a second stakeholders meeting with the same representatives to disseminate and validate our information.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health system gaps in cardiovascular disease prevention and management in Nepal

Shrestha

Maharjan

Bajracharya

et al. 2021

BMC Health Serv Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of deaths and disability in Nepal. Health systems can improve CVD health outcomes even in resource-limited settings by directing efforts to meet critical system gaps. This study aimed to identify Nepal’s health systems gaps to prevent and manage CVDs. Methods We formed a task force composed of the government and non-government representatives and assessed health system performance across six building blocks: governance, service delivery, human resources, medical products, information system, and financing in terms of equity, access, coverage, efficiency, quality, safety and sustainability. We reviewed 125 national health policies, plans, strategies, guidelines, reports and websites and conducted 52 key informant interviews. We grouped notes from desk review and transcripts’ codes into equity, access, coverage, efficiency, quality, safety and sustainability of the health system. Results National health insurance covers less than 10% of the population; and more than 50% of the health spending is out of pocket. The efficiency of CVDs prevention and management programs in Nepal is affected by the shortage of human resources, weak monitoring and supervision, and inadequate engagement of stakeholders. There are policies and strategies in place to ensure quality of care, however their implementation and supervision is weak. The total budget on health has been increasing over the past five years. However, the funding on CVDs is negligible. Conclusion Governments at the federal, provincial and local levels should prioritize CVDs care and partner with non-government organizations to improve preventive and curative CVDs services.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health system gaps in cardiovascular disease prevention and management in Nepal

Shrestha

Maharjan

Bajracharya

et al. 2021

BMC Health Serv Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Citizens were engaged in specific research activities such as priority-setting [ 40 – 42 ], advisory board/ steering committee membership [ 38 – 40 , 43 ], grant [ 44 ] and research proposal development [ 42 , 43 ], study design [ 42 , 45 – 48 ], study materials development [ 43 , 49 , 50 ], study administration and conduct [ 40 , 47 , 48 , 51 ], interpretation of findings [ 46 , 50 , 52 ], and dissemination [ 40 , 42 , 46 , 50 – 53 ]. Other studies described citizen engagement activities more generally as informing citizens of research goals so engagement may occur [ 54 ], collaboration [ 55 , 56 ], consultation [ 55 – 59 ], co-production [ 46 , 53 ], co-research [ 60 ], participation [ 57 ], and user control [ 56 ]. A word-cloud depicting descriptions of citizen engagement in the included studies is shown in Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review of methods to measure and evaluate citizen engagement in health research

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Citizen engagement, or partnering with interested members of the public in health research, is becoming more common. While ongoing assessment of citizen engagement practices is considered important to its success, there is little clarity around aspects of citizen engagement that are important to assess (i.e., what to look for) and methods to assess (i.e., how to measure and/ or evaluate) citizen engagement in health research. Methods In this scoping review, we included peer-reviewed literature that focused primarily on method(s) to measure and/or evaluate citizen engagement in health research. Independently and in duplicate, we completed title and abstract screening and full-text screening and extracted data including document characteristics, citizen engagement definitions and goals, and methods to measure or evaluate citizen engagement (including characteristics of these methods). Results Our search yielded 16,762 records of which 33 records (31 peer-reviewed articles, one government report, one conference proceeding) met our inclusion criteria. Studies discussed engaging citizens (i.e., patients [n = 16], members of the public [n = 7], service users/consumers [n = 4], individuals from specific disease groups [n = 3]) in research processes. Reported methods of citizen engagement measurement and evaluation included frameworks, discussion-based methods (i.e., focus groups, interviews), survey-based methods (e.g., audits, questionnaires), and other methods (e.g., observation, prioritization tasks). Methods to measure and evaluate citizen engagement commonly focused on collecting perceptions of citizens and researchers on aspects of citizen engagement including empowerment, impact, respect, support, and value. Discussion and conclusion We found that methods to measure and/or evaluate citizen engagement in health research vary widely but share some similarities in aspect of citizen engagement considered important to measure or evaluate. These aspects could be used to devise a more standardized, modifiable, and widely applicable framework for measuring and evaluating citizen engagement in research. Patient or public contribution Two citizen team members were involved as equal partners in study design and interpretation of its findings. Systematic review registration Open Science Framework (10.17605/OSF.IO/HZCBR).

show abstract

“…It became clear from the beginning that the focus should lie on counseling approaches and the development of guidelines. [3] 6) Role de nition…”

Section: Dissemination Of Outputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological Reflection on an Initiated Expert Stakeholder Engagement Process. A Case Study of a Dementia Prediction Discourse

Perry¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEngagement and participation are vital for including experiences, opinions, or expertise regarding the need for action and specifying goals of relevant stakeholders. In recent years, engagement processes have significantly gained in prominence especially in the field of healthcare; and participation has been actively demanded by public health agencies as well as by health research funding organizations. Despite numerous international work and wide agreement on the benefits of stakeholder engagement, there is still limited published empirical evidence on methodological best practices for stakeholder approaches and even less on evaluation or outcomes in the process of developing policy.MethodsOn the basis of previous research on stakeholder discourses and with the German case study at hand, I inferred normative criteria for the evaluation of discourse processes. For the methodological examination, my manuscript presents a comprehensive framework of normative criteria relevant to stakeholder engagement planning, implementation, evaluation and reporting, and to illustrate different evaluation and reporting needs for research on stakeholder engagement, namely, depth of participation, legitimate selection of stakeholders, representativeness, process management, output, role definition, and transparency. ResultsThe developed normative evaluation criteria make the evaluation of an engagement process with a large amount of material possible. My analysis indicates the key facilitating elements and also barriers of this participatory approach, demonstrating the importance of especially deploying the following evaluation criteria: output, representativeness, process management, and transparency.ConclusionThe seven developed evaluation criteria have been effective for the evaluation of the stakeholder discourse on dementia prediction. These evaluation criteria may also be conducive to the evaluation of engagement processes on other health research topics with a large corpus of material. To date and to my knowledge, a comprehensive evaluation framework for engagement processes with experts in the field of assessing biomedical issues is missing in the literature and my work aims at bridging this gap.

show abstract

Stakeholder Engagement in Planning the Design of a National Needs Assessment for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Management in Nepal

Cited by 12 publications

References 13 publications

Health system gaps in cardiovascular disease prevention and management in Nepal

Health system gaps in cardiovascular disease prevention and management in Nepal

A scoping review of methods to measure and evaluate citizen engagement in health research

Methodological Reflection on an Initiated Expert Stakeholder Engagement Process. A Case Study of a Dementia Prediction Discourse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About