Reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE).

Clicks: 354
ID: 83718
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #18 of 38 articles by views in BMC medical research methodology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Research priority setting with stakeholders can help direct the limited resources for health research toward priority areas of need. Ensuring transparency of the priority setting process can strengthen legitimacy and credibility for influencing the research agenda. This study aims to develop a reporting guideline for priority setting of health research.We searched electronic databases and relevant websites for sources (frameworks, guidelines, or models for conducting, appraising, reporting or evaluating health research priority setting, and reviews (including systematic reviews)), and primary studies of research priority setting to July 2019. We inductively developed a list of reporting items and piloted the preliminary guideline with a diverse range of 30 priority setting studies from the records retrieved.From 21,556 records, we included 26 sources for the candidate REPRISE framework and 455 primary research studies. The REporting guideline for PRIority SEtting of health research (REPRISE) has 31 reporting items that cover 10 domains: context and scope, governance and team, framework for priority setting, stakeholders/participants, identification and collection of priorities, prioritization of research topics, output, evaluation and feedback, translation and implementation, and funding and conflict of interest. Each reporting item includes a descriptor and examples.The REPRISE guideline can facilitate comprehensive reporting of studies of research priority setting. Improved transparency in research priority setting may strengthen the acceptability and implementation of the research priorities identified, so that efforts and funding are invested in generating evidence that is of importance to all stakeholders.Not applicable.
Reference Key
tong2019reportingbmc Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Tong, Allison;Synnot, Anneliese;Crowe, Sally;Hill, Sophie;Matus, Andrea;Scholes-Robertson, Nicole;Oliver, Sandy;Cowan, Katherine;Nasser, Mona;Bhaumik, Soumyadeep;Gutman, Talia;Baumgart, Amanda;Craig, Jonathan C;
Journal BMC medical research methodology
Year 2019
DOI
10.1186/s12874-019-0889-3
URL
Keywords
transparency patient involvement reporting priority-setting

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.