Cargando…

Identifying top 10 primary care research priorities from international stakeholders using a modified Delphi method

BACKGROUND: High quality primary care is fundamental to achieving health for all. Research priority setting is a key facilitator of improving how research activity responds to concrete needs. There has never before been an attempt to identify international primary care research priorities, in order...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: O’Neill, Braden, Aversa, Vanessa, Rouleau, Katherine, Lazare, Kim, Sullivan, Frank, Persaud, Nav
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6201922/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30359391
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206096
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: High quality primary care is fundamental to achieving health for all. Research priority setting is a key facilitator of improving how research activity responds to concrete needs. There has never before been an attempt to identify international primary care research priorities, in order to guide resource allocation and to enhance global primary care. This study aimed to identify a list of top 10 primary care research priorities, as identified by members of the public, health professionals working in primary care, researchers, and policymakers. METHODS: We adapted the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process, to conduct multiple rounds of stakeholder recruitment and prioritization. The study included an online survey conducted in three languages, followed by an in-person priority setting exercise involving primary care stakeholders from 13 countries. FINDINGS: Participants identified a list of top 10 international primary care research priorities. These were focused on diverse topics such as enhancing use of information and communication technology, and improving integration of indigenous communities’ knowledge in the design of primary care services. The main limitations of the study related to challenges in engaging an adequate diversity and number of appropriate stakeholders, particularly members of the public, in aggregating the diverse set of responses into coherent categories representative of the participants’ perspectives and in adequately representing the diversity of submitted responses while ensuring research priorities on the final list are sufficiently actionable to guide resource allocation. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 identified research priorities have the potential to guide research resource allocation, supporting funding agencies and initiatives to promote global primary care research and practice.