Dataset Information

Research Priorities for Fertility and Conception Research as Identified by Multidisciplinary Health Care Practitioners and Researchers.

ABSTRACT: The Robinson Research Institute of the University of Adelaide convened a multidisciplinary group of n = 33 clinicians, researchers and representatives of government organisations on the 2 October 2014 for a workshop entitled "Promoting fertility and healthy conception. How do we generate greater reproductive health awareness?" The key aim of the workshop was to assess the body of knowledge that informs clinical practice and government policy, and to identify questions and additional information needed by health practitioners and government representatives working in the field of reproductive health and to frame future research and policy. The workshop identified topics that fell mostly into three categories: lifestyle-related, societal and biological factors. The lifestyle topics included nutrition and diet, exercise, obesity, shift work and other factors deemed to be modifiable at the level of the individual. The societal topics included discussions of matters that are structural, and resistant to change by individuals, including specific ethical issues, social disadvantage, government and educational policies. The biological factors are intrinsic physical states of the individual, and included many factors where there is a dense body of scientific knowledge which may not be readily accessible in less academic language. This workshop thus provided an opportunity to identify further actions that could be undertaken to meet the needs of diverse organisations and groups of professionals with an interest in human fertility. Since so many factors in our social and biological environment can impact fertility and preconception health, it is imperative to involve many disciplines or levels of government or societal organisations that have not traditionally been involved in this area.

SUBMITTER: Moran LJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4728649 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Research Priorities for Fertility and Conception Research as Identified by Multidisciplinary Health Care Practitioners and Researchers.

Moran Lisa J LJ Spencer Laura L Russell Darryl L DL Hull Mary Louise ML Robertson Sarah A SA Varcoe Tamara J TJ Davies Michael J MJ Brown Hannah M HM Rodgers Raymond J RJ

Nutrients 20160113 1

The Robinson Research Institute of the University of Adelaide convened a multidisciplinary group of n = 33 clinicians, researchers and representatives of government organisations on the 2 October 2014 for a workshop entitled "Promoting fertility and healthy conception. How do we generate greater reproductive health awareness?" The key aim of the workshop was to assess the body of knowledge that informs clinical practice and government policy, and to identify questions and additional information ...[more]

PMID: 26771633

Similar Datasets

Project description:Funding for research is under pressure to be accountable in terms of benefits and translation of research findings into practice and policy. Primary health care research has considerable potential to improve health care in a wide range of settings, but little is known about the extent to which these impacts actually occur. This study examines the impact of individual primary health care research projects on policy and practice from the perspective of Chief Investigators (CIs).The project used an online survey adapted from the Buxton and Hanney Payback Framework to collect information about the impacts that CIs expected and achieved from primary health care research projects funded by Australian national competitive grants.Chief Investigators (CIs) provided information about seventeen completed projects. While no CI expected their project to have an impact in every domain of the framework used in the survey, 76% achieved at least half the impacts they expected. Sixteen projects had published and/or presented their work, 10 projects included 11 doctorate awards in their research capacity domain. All CIs expected their research to lead to further research opportunities with 11 achieving this. Ten CIs achieved their expectation of providing information for policy making but only four reported their research had influenced policy making. However 11 CIs achieved their expectation of providing information for organizational decision making and eight reported their research had influenced organizational decision making.CIs reported that nationally funded primary health care research projects made an impact on knowledge production, staff development and further research, areas within the realm of influence of the research team and within the scope of awareness of the CIs. Some also made an impact on policy and organizational decision-making, and on localized clinical practice and service delivery. CIs reported few broader economic benefits from their research. Routine use of an instrument of this type would facilitate primary health care research funders' determination of the payback for funding of research in this sector.

Project description:BackgroundDevelopments in digital health have the potential to transform the delivery of health and social care to help citizens manage their health. Currently, there is a lack of consensus about digital health research priorities in palliative care and a lack of theories about how these technologies might improve care outcomes. Therefore, it is important for health care leaders to identify innovations to ensure that an increasingly frail population has appropriate access to palliative care services. Consequently, it is important to articulate research priorities as the first step in determining how finite resources should be allocated to a field saturated with rapidly developing innovation.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to identify research priority areas for digital health in palliative care.MethodsWe selected digital health trends, most relevant to palliative care, from a list of emerging trends reported by a leading institute of quantitative futurists. We conducted 2 rounds of the Delphi questionnaire, followed by a consensus meeting and public engagement workshop to establish a final consensus on research priorities for digital technology in palliative care. We used the views of public representatives to gain their perspectives on the agreed priorities.ResultsA total of 103 experts (representing 11 countries) participated in the first Delphi round. Of the 103 experts, 55 (53.3%) participated in the second round. The final consensus meetings were attended by 10.7% (11/103) of the experts. We identified 16 priority areas, which involved many applications of technologies, including care for patients and caregivers, self-management and reporting of diseases, education and training, communication, care coordination, and research methodology. We summarized the priority areas into eight topics: big data, mobile devices, telehealth and telemedicine, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, smart home, biotechnology, and digital legacy.ConclusionsThe priorities identified in this study represent a wide range of important emerging areas in the fields of digital health, personalized medicine, and data science. Human-centered design and robust governance systems should be considered in future research. It is important that the risks of using these technologies in palliative care are properly addressed to ensure that these tools are used meaningfully, wisely, and safely and do not cause unintentional harm.

Project description:BackgroundInfertility is a major health issue worldwide, yet very few examples of interventions addressing infertility in the Global South have been documented to date. In The Gambia, West Africa, infertility is recognised as a burden and the health authorities have included it in several health policies and the new National Reproductive Health Strategy however, a detailed operationalisation plan for fertility care has not yet been established. Here, we aim to understand and document the factors that influence the implementation of fertility care in The Gambia.MethodsWe conducted 46 semi-structured interviews with policymakers, implementers, and health practitioners in both the public and private sectors from July to November 2021. The interviews were transcribed, anonymised and analysed with NVivo Pro version 1.6.1. The analysis was initially inductive, with themes arising from the coding categorised according to the WHO health systems building blocks framework.ResultsThis study identified several barriers to a successful implementation of fertility care in The Gambia, including (i) a lack of routinely collected infertility data; (ii) an absence of financial protection mechanisms for patients, and/or a specific budget for infertility; (iii) limited cooperation between the public and private sectors in the provision of fertility care; and (iv) gaps in fertility care training among health practitioners. Conversely, enablers included: (i) strong national infertility leadership; and (ii) the integration of infertility care within public reproductive health services.ConclusionThe Gambian health system is not yet in the position to support a comprehensive fertility care package in its public health facilities. Several aspects of the implementation of fertility care must be considered in operationalising the health strategy including the systematic collection of infertility data, fertility awareness, and the provision of specialised fertility care training. Furthermore, a stronger partnership between the public and private sectors must be developed. Given the increasing availability of assisted reproductive technologies in the sub-Saharan Africa region, and the tendency to locate these technologies in the private sector, further research is needed to understand and identify the processes underlying the implementation of fertility care and to foster better integration with the existing health system.

Project description:BackgroundMaternal health outcomes in the USA are far worse than in peer nations. Increasing implementation research in maternity care is critical to addressing quality gaps and unwarranted variations in care. Implementation research priorities have not yet been defined or well represented in the plans for maternal health research investments in the USA.MethodsThis descriptive study used a modified Delphi method to solicit and rank research priorities at the intersection of implementation science and maternal health through two sequential web-based surveys. A purposeful, yet broad sample of researchers with relevant subject matter knowledge was identified through searches of published articles and grant databases. The surveys addressed five implementation research areas in maternal health: (1) practices to prioritize for broader implementation, (2) practices to prioritize for de-implementation, (3) research questions about implementation determinants, (4) research questions about implementation strategies, and (5) research questions about methods/measures.ResultsOf 160 eligible researchers, 82 (51.2%) agreed to participate. Participants were predominantly female (90%) and White (75%). Sixty completed at least one of two surveys. The practices that participants prioritized for broader implementation were improved postpartum care, perinatal and postpartum mood disorder screening and management, and standardized management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. For de-implementation, practices believed to be most impactful if removed from or reduced in maternity care were cesarean delivery for low-risk patients and routine discontinuation of all psychiatric medications during pregnancy. The top methodological priorities of participants were improving the extent to which implementation science frameworks and measures address equity and developing approaches for involving patients in implementation research.ConclusionsThrough a web-based Delphi exercise, we identified implementation research priorities that researchers consider to have the greatest potential to improve the quality of maternity care in the USA. This study also demonstrates the feasibility of using modified Delphi approaches to engage researchers in setting implementation research priorities within a clinical area.

Dataset Information

Research Priorities for Fertility and Conception Research as Identified by Multidisciplinary Health Care Practitioners and Researchers.

Publications

Research Priorities for Fertility and Conception Research as Identified by Multidisciplinary Health Care Practitioners and Researchers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets