Setting priorities for zinc-related health research to reduce children's disease burden worldwide: an application of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative's research priority-setting method

Setting research priorities for sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health in humanitarian settings

Background

An estimated 70.8 million people are forcibly displaced worldwide, 75% of whom are women and children. Prioritizing a global research agenda to inform guidance, service delivery, access to and quality of services is essential to improve the survival and health of women, children and adolescents in humanitarian settings.

Method

A mixed-methods design was adapted from the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to solicit priority research questions across the sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (SRMNCAH) domains in humanitarian settings. The first step (CHNRI) involved data collection and scoring of perceived priority questions, using a web-based survey over two rounds (first, to generate the questions and secondly, to score them). Over 1000 stakeholders from across the globe were approached; 177 took part in the first survey and 69 took part in the second. These research questions were prioritized by generating a research prioritization score (RPP) across four dimensions: answerability, program feasibility, public health relevance and equity. A Delphi process of 29 experts followed, where the 50 scored and prioritized CHRNI research questions were shortlisted. The top five questions from the CHNRI scored list for each SRMNCAH domain were voted on, rendering a final list per domain.

Results

A total of 280 questions were generated. Generated questions covered sexual and reproductive health (SRH) (n = 90, 32.1%), maternal health (n = 75, 26.8%), newborn health (n = 42, 15.0%), child health (n = 43, 15.4%), and non-SRH aspects of adolescent health (n = 31, 11.1%). A shortlist of the top ten prioritized questions for each domain were generated on the basis of the computed RPPs. During the Delphi process, the prioritized questions, based on the CHNRI process, were further refined. Five questions from the shortlist of each of the SRMNCAH domain were formulated, resulting in 25 priority questions across SRMNCAH. For example, one of the prioritized SRH shortlisted and prioritized research question included: “What are effective strategies to implement good quality comprehensive contraceptive services (long-acting, short-acting and EC) for women and girls in humanitarian settings?”

Conclusion

Data needs, effective intervention strategies and approaches, as well as greater efficiency and quality during delivery of care in humanitarian settings were prioritized. The findings from this research provide guidance for researchers, program implementers, as well as donor agencies on SRMNCAH research priorities in humanitarian settings. A global research agenda could save the lives of those who are at greatest risk and vulnerability as well as increase opportunities for translation and innovation for SRMNCAH in humanitarian settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13031-021-00353-w.

Uptake and impact of priority setting exercises in nutrition research publications

OBJECTIVE

To assess how priority setting exercises for nutrition research are considered in publication.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design.

SETTINGS

First, a citation analysis of priority setting exercises found in nutrition research until 2019 was conducted. The reasons for citation were extracted from the text of citing papers and the reasons were defined as: (i) acting on the research questions identified as priorities, (ii) acknowledging the priority setting exercise, (iii) using the same method, or (iv) previous knowledge to support evidence. Second, a survey with authors of the priority setting exercises was done to understand priority setters' perspectives on the impact and satisfaction of their work.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one priority setting exercise papers were included. In all, 434 citing papers were found, of which 338 were considered in the citation analysis. A sample of 17 authors representing 13 priority setting exercise papers completed the impact and satisfaction survey.

RESULTS

Half of the priority setting exercise papers were published by 2013. After excluding self-citations (n = 60), the priority setting papers had on average 18 citations. Priority setting exercises had a median of 1 (IQR = 0-1) citing manuscript that acted on the recommendations produced from priority setting exercises. Authors of the priority setting exercises expressed a desire for increased uptake of the results of the priority setting exercises by funding agencies. Key barriers for uptake were identified as challenges in involving stakeholders and the general public for participation in the priority setting exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

Priority settings exercises are important efforts to guide nutrition research toward effective allocation of resources. However, there seems to be a limited consideration of these priority setting exercises in research papers.

Setting research priorities on multiple micronutrient supplementation in pregnancy

Prenatal micronutrient deficiencies are associated with negative maternal and birth outcomes. Multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) during pregnancy is a cost-effective intervention to reduce these adverse outcomes. However, important knowledge gaps remain in the implementation of MMS interventions. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology was applied to inform the direction of research and investments needed to support the implementation of MMS interventions for pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Following CHNRI methodology guidelines, a group of international experts in nutrition and maternal health provided and ranked the research questions that most urgently need to be resolved for prenatal MMS interventions to be successfully implemented. Seventy-three research questions were received, analyzed, and reorganized, resulting in 35 consolidated research questions. These were scored against four criteria, yielding a priority ranking where the top 10 research options focused on strategies to increase antenatal care attendance and MMS adherence, methods needed to identify populations more likely to benefit from MMS interventions and some discovery issues (e.g., potential benefit of extending MMS through lactation). This exercise prioritized 35 discrete research questions that merit serious consideration for the potential of MMS during pregnancy to be optimized in LMIC.

Perspective: Consideration of Values When Setting Priorities in Nutrition Research: Guidance for Transparency

Nutrition research can guide interventions to tackle the burden of diet-related diseases. Setting priorities in nutrition research, however, requires the engagement of various stakeholders with diverse insights. Consideration of what matters most in research from a scientific, social, and ethical perspective is therefore not an automatic process. Systematic ways to explicitly define and consider relevant values are largely lacking. Here, we review existing nutrition research priority-setting exercises, analyze how values are reported, and provide guidance for transparent consideration of values while setting priorities in nutrition research. Of the 27 (n = 22 peer-reviewed manuscripts and 5 grey literature documents) studies reviewed, 40.7% used a combination of different methods, 59.3% described the represented stakeholders, and 49.1% reported on follow-up activities. All priority-setting exercises were led by research groups based in high-income countries. Via an iterative qualitative content analysis, reported values were identified (n = 22 manuscripts). Three clusters of values (i.e., those related to impact, feasibility, and accountability) were identified. These values were organized in a tool to help those involved in setting research priorities systematically consider and report values. The tool was finalized through an online consultation with 7 international stakeholders. The value-oriented tool for priority setting in nutrition research identifies and presents values that are already implicitly and explicitly represented in priority-setting exercises. It provides guidance to enable explicit deliberation on research priorities from an ethical perspective. In addition, it can serve as a reporting tool to document how value-laden choices are made during priority setting and help foster the accountability of stakeholders involved.

Setting an implementation research agenda for Canadian investments in global maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health: a research prioritization exercise

BACKGROUND

Improving global maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (MNCAH) is a top development priority in Canada, as shown by the $6.35 billion in pledges toward the Muskoka Initiative since 2010. To guide Canadian research investments, we aimed to systematically identify a set of implementation research priorities for MNCAH in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method. We scanned the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative literature and extracted research questions pertaining to delivery of interventions, inviting Canadian experts on MNCAH to generate additional questions. The experts scored a combined list of 97 questions against 5 criteria: answerability, feasibility, deliverability, impact and effect on equity. These questions were ranked using a research priority score, and the average expert agreement score was calculated for each question.

RESULTS

The overall research priority score ranged from 40.14 to 89.25, with a median of 71.84. The average expert agreement scores ranged from 0.51 to 0.82, with a median of 0.64. Highly-ranked research questions varied across the life course and focused on improving detection and care-seeking for childhood illnesses, overcoming barriers to intervention uptake and delivery, effectively implementing human resources and mobile technology, and increasing coverage among at-risk populations. Children were the most represented target population and most questions pertained to interventions delivered at the household or community level.

INTERPRETATION

Investing in implementation research is critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goal of ensuring health and well-being for all. The proposed research agenda is expected to drive action and Canadian research investments to improve MNCAH.

Setting priorities for research in medical nutrition education: an international approach

OBJECTIVES

To identify the research priorities for medical nutrition education worldwide.

DESIGN

A 5-step stakeholder engagement process based on methodological guidelines for identifying research priorities in health.

PARTICIPANTS

277 individuals were identified as representatives for 30 different stakeholder organisations across 86 countries. The stakeholder organisations represented the views of medical educators, medical students, doctors, patients and researchers in medical education.

INTERVENTIONS

Each stakeholder representative was asked to provide up to three research questions that should be deemed as a priority for medical nutrition education.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Research questions were critically appraised for answerability, sustainability, effectiveness, potential for translation and potential to impact on disease burden. A blinded scoring system was used to rank the appraised questions, with higher scores indicating higher priority (range of scores possible 36-108).

RESULTS

37 submissions were received, of which 25 were unique research questions. Submitted questions received a range of scores from 62 to 106 points. The highest scoring questions focused on (1) increasing the confidence of medical students and doctors in providing nutrition care to patients, (2) clarifying the essential nutrition skills doctors should acquire, (3) understanding the effectiveness of doctors at influencing dietary behaviours and (4) improving medical students' attitudes towards the importance of nutrition.

CONCLUSIONS

These research questions can be used to ensure future projects in medical nutrition education directly align with the needs and preferences of research stakeholders. Funders should consider these priorities in their commissioning of research.

Setting priorities for a research agenda to combat drug-resistant tuberculosis in children

SETTING

Numerous knowledge gaps hamper the prevention and treatment of childhood drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB). Identifying research priorities is vital to inform and develop strategies to address this neglected problem.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically identify and rank research priorities in childhood drug-resistant TB.

DESIGN

Adapting the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology, we compiled 53 research questions in four research areas, then classified the questions into three research types. We invited experts in childhood drug-resistant TB to score these questions through an online survey.

RESULTS

A total of 81 respondents participated in the survey. The top-ranked research question was to identify the best combination of existing diagnostic tools for early diagnosis. Highly ranked treatment-related questions centred on the reasons for and interventions to improve treatment outcomes, adverse effects of drugs and optimal treatment duration. The prevalence of drug-resistant TB was the highest-ranked question in the epidemiology area. The development type questions that ranked highest focused on interventions for optimal diagnosis, treatment and modalities for treatment delivery.

CONCLUSION

This is the first effort to identify and rank research priorities for childhood drug-resistant TB. The result is a resource to guide research to improve prevention and treatment of drug-resistant TB in children.

Setting research priorities to improve global newborn health and prevent stillbirths by 2025

Background

In 2013, an estimated 2.8 million newborns died and 2.7 million were stillborn. A much greater number suffer from long term impairment associated with preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction, congenital anomalies, and perinatal or infectious causes. With the approaching deadline for the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015, there was a need to set the new research priorities on newborns and stillbirth with a focus not only on survival but also on health, growth and development. We therefore carried out a systematic exercise to set newborn health research priorities for 2013–2025.

Methods

We used adapted Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methods for this prioritization exercise. We identified and approached the 200 most productive researchers and 400 program experts, and 132 of them submitted research questions online. These were collated into a set of 205 research questions, sent for scoring to the 600 identified experts, and were assessed and scored by 91 experts.

Results

Nine out of top ten identified priorities were in the domain of research on improving delivery of known interventions, with simplified neonatal resuscitation program and clinical algorithms and improved skills of community health workers leading the list. The top 10 priorities in the domain of development were led by ideas on improved Kangaroo Mother Care at community level, how to improve the accuracy of diagnosis by community health workers, and perinatal audits. The 10 leading priorities for discovery research focused on stable surfactant with novel modes of administration for preterm babies, ability to diagnose fetal distress and novel tocolytic agents to delay or stop preterm labour.

Conclusion

These findings will assist both donors and researchers in supporting and conducting research to close the knowledge gaps for reducing neonatal mortality, morbidity and long term impairment. WHO, SNL and other partners will work to generate interest among key national stakeholders, governments, NGOs, and research institutes in these priorities, while encouraging research funders to support them. We will track research funding, relevant requests for proposals and trial registers to monitor if the priorities identified by this exercise are being addressed.

How are health research priorities set in low and middle income countries? A systematic review of published reports

BACKGROUND

Priority setting is increasingly recognised as essential for directing finite resources to support research that maximizes public health benefits and drives health equity. Priority setting processes have been undertaken in a number of low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, using a variety of methods. We undertook a critical review of reports of these processes.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched electronic databases and online for peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature. We found 91 initiatives that met inclusion criteria. The majority took place at the global level (46%). For regional or national initiatives, most focused on Sub Saharan Africa (49%), followed by East Asia and Pacific (20%) and Latin America and the Caribbean (18%). A quarter of initiatives aimed to cover all areas of health research, with a further 20% covering communicable diseases. The most frequently used process was a conference or workshop to determine priorities (24%), followed by the Child Health and Nutrition Initiative (CHNRI) method (18%). The majority were initiated by an international organization or collaboration (46%). Researchers and government were the most frequently represented stakeholders. There was limited evidence of any implementation or follow-up strategies. Challenges in priority setting included engagement with stakeholders, data availability, and capacity constraints.

CONCLUSIONS

Health research priority setting (HRPS) has been undertaken in a variety of LMIC settings. While not consistently used, the application of established methods provides a means of identifying health research priorities in a repeatable and transparent manner. In the absence of published information on implementation or evaluation, it is not possible to assess what the impact and effectiveness of health research priority setting may have been.

Neonatal survival in complex humanitarian emergencies: setting an evidence-based research agenda

BACKGROUND

Over 40% of all deaths among children under 5 are neonatal deaths (0-28 days), and this proportion is increasing. In 2012, 2.9 million newborns died, with 99% occurring in low- and middle-income countries. Many of the countries with the highest neonatal mortality rates globally are currently or have recently been affected by complex humanitarian emergencies. Despite the global burden of neonatal morbidity and mortality and risks inherent in complex emergency situations, research investments are not commensurate to burden and little is known about the epidemiology or best practices for neonatal survival in these settings.

METHODS

We used the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to prioritize research questions on neonatal health in complex humanitarian emergencies. Experts evaluated 35 questions using four criteria (answerability, feasibility, relevance, equity) with three subcomponents per criterion. Using SAS 9.2, a research prioritization score (RPS) and average expert agreement score (AEA) were calculated for each question.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight experts evaluated all 35 questions. RPS ranged from 0.846 to 0.679 and the AEA ranged from 0.667 to 0.411. The top ten research priorities covered a range of issues but generally fell into two categories- epidemiologic and programmatic components of neonatal health. The highest ranked question in this survey was "What strategies are effective in increasing demand for, and use of skilled attendance?"

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a diverse group of experts used the CHRNI methodology to systematically identify and determine research priorities for neonatal health and survival in complex humanitarian emergencies. The priorities included the need to better understand the magnitude of the disease burden and interventions to improve neonatal health in complex humanitarian emergencies. The findings from this study will provide guidance to researchers and program implementers in neonatal and complex humanitarian fields to engage on the research priorities needed to save lives most at risk.

Developing a sustainable nutrition research agenda in sub-Saharan Africa--findings from the SUNRAY project

Patrick Kolsteren and colleagues present the findings of a collaborative effort by stakeholders in sub-Saharan Africa to identify priorities for nutrition research. They propose a new approach that stimulates demand from policy makers for research and holds them accountable for incorporating research into policy and practice. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Research priorities for mental health and psychosocial support in humanitarian settings

Wietse Tol and colleagues lay out a a consensus-based research agenda for mental health and psychosocial support in humanitarian settings.

Accelerating improvements in nutritional and health status of young children in the Sahel region of Sub-Saharan Africa: review of international guidelines on infant and young child feeding and nutrition

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child holds governments responsible to ensure children's right to the highest attainable standard of health by providing breastfeeding support, and access to nutritious foods, appropriate health care, and clean drinking water. International experts have identified key child care practices and programmatic activities that are proven to be effective at reducing infant and young child undernutrition, morbidity, and mortality. Nevertheless, progress towards reducing the prevalence of undernutrition has been sporadic across countries of the Sahel sub-region of Sub-Saharan Africa. In view of this uneven progress, a working group of international agencies was convened to 'Reposition children's right to adequate nutrition in the Sahel.' The first step towards this goal was to organize a situational analysis of the legislative, research, and programmatic activities related to infant and young child nutrition (IYCN) in six countries of the sub-region: Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal. The purposes of this introductory paper are to review current information concerning the nutritional and health status of infants and young children in the Sahel and to summarize international guidelines on optimal IYCN practices. These guidelines were used in completing the above-mentioned situational analyses and encompass specific recommendations on: (i) breastfeeding (introduction within the first hour after birth, exclusivity to 6 months, continuation to at least 24 months); (ii) complementary feeding (introduction at 6 months, use of nutrient dense foods, adequate frequency and consistency, and responsive feeding); (iii) prevention and/or treatment of micronutrient deficiencies (vitamin A, zinc, iron and anaemia, and iodine); (iv) prevention and/or treatment of acute malnutrition; (v) feeding practices adapted to the maternal situation to reduce mother-to-child transmission of HIV; (vi) activities to ensure food security; and (vii) the promotion of hygienic practices concerning food preparation and storage and environmental sanitation. The following papers in this issue will present results of the situational analyses for the individual countries.

Setting research priorities to reduce almost one million deaths from birth asphyxia by 2015

Joy Lawn and colleagues used a systematic process developed by the Child Health Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to define and rank research options to reduce mortality from intrapartum-related neonatal deaths (birth asphyxia) by the year 2015.

Evidence-based priority setting for health care and research: tools to support policy in maternal, neonatal, and child health in Africa

As part of a series on maternal, neonatal, and child health in sub-Saharan Africa, Igor Rudan and colleagues discuss various priority-setting tools for health care and research that can help develop evidence-based policy.

Setting priorities for global mental health research

OBJECTIVE

To set investment priorities in global mental health research and to propose a more rational use of funds in this under-resourced and under-investigated area.

METHODS

Members of the Lancet Mental Health Group systematically listed and scored research investment options on four broad classes of disorders: schizophrenia and other major psychotic disorders, major depressive disorder and other common mental disorders, alcohol abuse and other substance abuse disorders, and the broad class of child and adolescent mental disorders. Using the priority-setting approach of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative, the group listed various research questions and evaluated them using the criteria of answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, equity and potential impact on persisting burden of mental health disorders. Scores were then weighted according to the system of values expressed by a larger group of stakeholders.

FINDINGS

The research questions that scored highest were related to health policy and systems research, where and how to deliver existing cost-effective interventions in a low-resource context, and epidemiological research on the broad categories of child and adolescent mental disorders or those pertaining to alcohol and drug abuse questions. The questions that scored lowest related to the development of new interventions and new drugs or pharmacological agents, vaccines or other technologies.

CONCLUSION

In the context of global mental health and with a time frame of the next 10 years, it would be best to fill critical knowledge gaps by investing in research into health policy and systems, epidemiology and improved delivery of cost-effective interventions.

Research priorities to reduce global mortality from newborn infections by 2015

BACKGROUND

Newborn infections are responsible for approximately one-third of the estimated 4.0 million neonatal deaths that occur globally every year. Appropriately targeted research is required to guide investment in effective interventions, especially in low resource settings. Setting global priorities for research to address neonatal infections is essential and urgent.

METHODS

The Department of Child and Adolescent Health and Development of the World Health Organization (WHO/CAH) applied the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) priority-setting methodology to identify and stimulate research most likely to reduce global newborn infection-related mortality by 2015. Technical experts were invited by WHO/CAH to systematically list and then use standard methods to score research questions according to their likelihood to (i) be answered in an ethical way, (ii) lead to (or improve) effective interventions, (iii) be deliverable, affordable, and sustainable, (iv) maximize death burden reduction, and (v) have an equitable effect in the population. The scores were then weighted according to the values provided by a wide group of stakeholders from the global research priority-setting network.

FINDINGS

On a 100-point scale, the final priority scores for 69 research questions ranged from 39 to 83. Most of the 15 research questions that received the highest scores were in the domain of health systems and policy research to address barriers affecting existing cost-effective interventions. The priority questions focused on promotion of home care practices to prevent newborn infections and approaches to increase coverage and quality of management of newborn infections in health facilities as well as in the community. While community-based intervention research is receiving some current investment, rigorous evaluation and cost analysis is almost entirely lacking for research on facility-based interventions and quality improvement.

INTERPRETATION

Given the lack of progress in improving newborn survival despite the existence of effective interventions, it is not surprising that of the top ranked research priorities in this article the majority are in the domain of health systems and policy research. We urge funding agencies and investigators to invest in these research priorities to accelerate reduction of neonatal deaths, particularly those due to infections.