Dataset Information

Research priorities for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed-methods synthesis of two separate exercises.

ABSTRACT: Background:In order to clarify priorities and stimulate research in adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted two priority-setting exercises based on the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology related to 1) adolescent sexual and reproductive health and 2) eight areas of adolescent health including communicable diseases prevention and management, injuries and violence, mental health, non-communicable diseases management, nutrition, physical activity, substance use, and health policy. Although the CHNRI methodology has been utilized in over 50 separate research priority setting exercises, none have qualitatively synthesized the ultimate findings across studies. The purpose of this study was to conduct a mixed-method synthesis of two research priority-setting exercises for adolescent health in LMICs based on the CHNRI methodology and to situate the priority questions within the current global health agenda. Methods:All of the 116 top-ranked questions presented in each exercise were analyzed by two independent reviewers. Word clouds were generated based on keywords from the top-ranked questions. Questions were coded and content analysis was conducted based on type of delivery platform, vulnerable populations, and the Survive, Thrive, and Transform framework from the United Nations Global Strategy for Women's, Children's, and Adolescents' Health, 2016-2030. Findings:Within the 53 top-ranked intervention-related questions that specified a delivery platform, the platforms specified were schools (n = 17), primary care (n = 12), community (n = 11), parenting (n = 6), virtual media (n = 5), and peers (n = 2). Twenty questions specifically focused on vulnerable adolescents, including those living with HIV, tuberculosis, mental illness, or neurodevelopmental disorders; victims of gender-based violence; refugees; young persons who inject drugs; sex workers; slum dwellers; out-of-school youth; and youth in armed conflict. A majority of the top-ranked questions (108/116) aligned with one or a combination of the Survive (n = 39), Thrive (n = 67), and Transform (n = 28) agendas. Conclusions:This study advances the CHNRI methodology by conducting the first mixed-methods synthesis of multiple research priority-setting exercises by analyzing keywords (using word clouds) and themes (using content analysis).

SUBMITTER: Nagata JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5825976 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify patient-generated priority topics for future primary care research in British Columbia (BC), Canada within a diverse patient population.DesignMixed-methods priority setting exercises framed by the dialogue model, using the nominal group technique (rank-ordered scoring) and province-wide online surveys capturing importance ratings of the top 10 primary healthcare topics from patients and primary care providers.SettingBC, Canada.ParticipantsTopic identification was completed by 10 patient partners (7 female, 3 male) from the BC Primary Health Care Research Network Patient Advisory; online surveys were completed by 464 patients and 173 primary care providers.ResultsThe 10 members recruited to the patient advisory provided over 80 experiences of what stood out for them in BC primary care, which were grouped thematically into 18 topics, 10 of which were retained in province-wide surveys. Top-rated survey topics for both patients (n=464) and providers (n=173) included being unable to find a regular family doctor/other primary healthcare provider, support for living with chronic conditions, mental health resources and information sharing, including electronic medical records. However, all 10 topics were rated important, on average, by both groups.ConclusionsThe current project activities demonstrate the feasibility of including patients in priority setting exercises for primary healthcare in general, rather than focusing on a condition-specific population or disease area. There was considerable overlap between patient-generated topics and topics previously identified by other stakeholders, but patients identified two additional topics (mental health resources, improve and strengthen patient-provider communication). More similarities than differences in topic importance between patients and providers emerged in the online surveys. The project activities that follow (rapid literature reviews, multistakeholder dialogue) will highlight under-researched topics and inform the development of specific research questions.

Project description:Priority-setting in health is risky and challenging, particularly in resource-constrained settings. It is not simply a narrow technical exercise, and involves the mobilisation of a wide range of capacities among stakeholders - not only the technical capacity to "do" research in economic evaluations. Using the Individuals, Nodes, Networks and Environment (INNE) framework, we identify those stakeholders, whose capacity needs will vary along the evidence-to-policy continuum. Policymakers and healthcare managers require the capacity to commission and use relevant evidence (including evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness, and of social values); academics need to understand and respond to decision-makers' needs to produce relevant research. The health system at all levels will need institutional capacity building to incentivise routine generation and use of evidence. Knowledge brokers, including priority-setting agencies (such as England's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and Health Interventions and Technology Assessment Program, Thailand) and the media can play an important role in facilitating engagement and knowledge transfer between the various actors. Especially at the outset but at every step, it is critical that patients and the public understand that trade-offs are inherent in priority-setting, and careful efforts should be made to engage them, and to hear their views throughout the process. There is thus no single approach to capacity building; rather a spectrum of activities that recognises the roles and skills of all stakeholders. A range of methods, including formal and informal training, networking and engagement, and support through collaboration on projects, should be flexibly employed (and tailored to specific needs of each country) to support institutionalisation of evidence-informed priority-setting. Finally, capacity building should be a two-way process; those who build capacity should also attend to their own capacity development in order to sustain and improve impact.

Project description:The World Health Organization announced an ambitious call for cervical cancer elimination worldwide. With existing prevention and treatment modalities, cervical cancer elimination is now within reach for high-income countries. Despite limited financing and capacity constraints in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), prevention and control efforts can be supported through integrated services and new technologies. We conducted this scoping review to outline a roadmap toward cervical cancer elimination in LMICs and highlight evidence-based interventions and research priorities to accelerate cervical cancer elimination. We reviewed and synthesized literature from 2010 to 2020 on primary and secondary cervical cancer prevention strategies. In addition, we conducted expert interviews with gynecologic and infectious disease providers, researchers, and LMIC health officials. Using these data, we developed a logic model to summarize the current state of science and identified evidence gaps and priority research questions for each prevention strategy. The logic model for cervical cancer elimination maps the needs for improved collaboration between policy makers, production and supply, healthcare systems, providers, health workers, and communities. The model articulates responsibilities for stakeholders and visualizes processes to increase access to and coverage of prevention methods. We discuss the challenges of contextual factors and highlight innovation needs. Effective prevention methods include HPV vaccination, screening using visual inspection and HPV testing, and thermocoagulation. However, vaccine coverage remains low in LMICs. New strategies, including single-dose vaccination could enhance impact. Loss to follow-up and treatment delays could be addressed by improved same-day screen-and-treat technologies. We provide a practical framework to guide cervical cancer elimination in LMICs. The scoping review highlights existing and innovative strategies, unmet needs, and collaborations required to achieve elimination across implementation contexts.

Project description:IntroductionIn low/middle-income countries (LMICs), the prevalence of people diagnosed with dementia is expected to increase substantially and treatment options are limited, with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors not used as frequently as in high-income countries (HICs). Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a group-based, brief, non-pharmacological intervention for people with dementia that significantly improves cognition and quality of life in clinical trials and is cost-effective in HIC. However, its implementation in other countries is less researched. This protocol describes CST-International; an implementation research study of CST. The aim of this research is to develop, test, refine and disseminate implementation strategies for CST for people with mild to moderate dementia in three LMICs: Brazil (upper middle-income), India (lower middle-income) and Tanzania (low-income).Methods and analysisFour overlapping phases: (1) exploration of barriers to implementation in each country using meetings with stakeholders, including clinicians, policymakers, people with dementia and their families; (2) development of implementation plans for each country; (3) evaluation of implementation plans using a study of CST in each country (n=50, total n=150). Outcomes will include adherence, attendance, acceptability and attrition, agreed parameters of success, outcomes (cognition, quality of life, activities of daily living) and cost/affordability; (4) refinement and dissemination of implementation strategies, enabling ongoing pathways to practice which address barriers and facilitators to implementation.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted for each country. There are no documented adverse effects associated with CST and data held will be in accordance with relevant legislation. Train the trainer models will be developed to increase CST provision in each country and policymakers/governmental bodies will be continually engaged with to aid successful implementation. Findings will be disseminated at conferences, in peer-reviewed articles and newsletters, in collaboration with Alzheimer's Disease International, and via ongoing engagement with key policymakers.

Dataset Information

Research priorities for adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed-methods synthesis of two separate exercises.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets