Patients' and clinicians' research priorities

Health Expectations

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 439-448

  Stewart, Ruth J ^a,b   Caird, Jenny ^a   Oliver, Kathryn ^c   Oliver, Sandy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG   (South Africa)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Collaboration; Patient involvement; Research agenda; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; PATIENT; RESEARCH; REVIEW;

HEALTH PERSONNEL; HEALTH PRIORITIES; HUMANS; PATIENTS; RESEARCH;

EID: 79951593959     PISSN: 13696513     EISSN: 13697625     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00648.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Oliver S, Clarke-Jones L, Rees R et al. Involving consumers in research and development agenda setting for the NHS: developing an evidence-based approach. Health Technology Assessment, 2004; 8: 1-148.
2. World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland from 10th -11th April 2008.
3. Oliver S. The progress of lay involvement in the NHS research and development programme. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2009; 2: 273-280.
4. Department of Health. Best Research for Best Health. Research and Development Directorate, London: Department of Health, 2006.
5. Medical Research Council. Clinical Trials for Tomorrow: An MRC review of randomised control trials. London: MRC, 2003.
6. Jones J, Hunter D. Consensus methods for medical and health services research. British Medical Journal, 1995; 311: 376-380.
7. Jones J, Hunter D. Using the Delphi and nominal group technique in health services research. In: Pope C, Mays N (eds) Qualitative Research in Health Care. London: BMJ Books, 2000: 132-141.
8. Murphy MK, Black NA, Lamping DL et al. Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technology Assessment, 1998; 2: 1-90.
9. Thompson J, Barber R, Ward PR et al. Health researchers' attitudes towards public involvement in health research. Health Expectations, 2009; 12: 209-220.
10. Collins HM, Evans R. The third wave of science studies: studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 2002; 32: 235-296.
11. Garland AF. Multiple stakeholder agreement on desired outcomes for adolescents' mental health services. Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2004; 55: 671-676.
12. Higgins PDR, Schwartz M, Mapili J, Krokos I, Leung J, Zimmerman E. Patient defined dichotomous end points for remission and clinical improvement in ulcerative colitis. Gut, 2005; 54: 782-788.
13. Clark A, Friedman M. The relative importance of treatment outcomes: a Delphi group weighting in mental health. Evaluation review, 1982; 6: 79-93.
14. Saunders C, Girgis A, Butow P, Crossing S, Penman A. Beyond scientific rigour: funding cancer research of public value. Health Policy, 2007; 84(2-3): 1-9.
15. Revicki DA, Leidy NK, Brennan-Diemer F, Sorensen S, Togias A. Integrating patient preferences into health outcomes assessment: the multiattribute Asthma symptom utility index. Chest, 1998; 114: 998-1007.
16. Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M, Horey D, O'Boyle C. Evaluating maternity care: a core set of outcome measures. Birth, 2007; 34: 164-172.
17. Hagen S, Hunt J. Assessing nurses' views of research priorities: a pilot study. Managing Clinical Nursing, 1998; 2: 49-53.
18. Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M et al. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT III. Journal of Rheumatology, 1997; 24: 799-802.
19. Clarke M. Standardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviews. Trials, 2007; 8: 39 DOI:.
20. Kirwan J, Heiberg T, Hewlett S et al. Outcomes from the patient perspective workshop at OMERACT 6. Journal of Rheumatology, 2003; 30: 868-872.
21. Kirwan J, Ahlmen M, De Wit M et al. Progress since OMERACT 6 on including patient perspective in rheumatoid arthritis outcome assessment. Journal of Rheumatology, 2005; 32: 2246-2249.
22. Kirwan J, Hewlett SE, Heiberg T et al. Incorporating the patient perspective into outcome assessment in rheumatoid arthritis-progress at OMERACT 7. Journal of Rheumatology, 2005; 32: 2250-2256.
23. Saag KG. OMERACT 6 brings new perspectives to rheumatology measurement research. Journal of Rheumatology, 2003; 30: 639-641.
24. Tugwell P, Boers M, Brooks P, Simon L, Strand V, Idzerda L. OMERACT: an international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology. Trials, 2007; 8: 38 DOI:.
25. Western Consortium for Cancer Nursing Research. Priorities for cancer nursing research: a Canadian replication. Cancer Nursing, 1987; 6: 319-326.
26. Daniels L. The way forward: identifying palliative nursing research priorities within a hospice. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 2001; 7: 442-448.
27. Caron-Flinterman JF, Broerse JEW, Teerling J et al. Patients influence. Stakeholder participation in health research agenda setting: the case of asthma and COPD research in the Netherlands. Science & Public Policy, 2006; 33: 291-304.
28. Grant-Pearce C, Miles I, Hills P. Mismatches in Priorities for Health Research Between Professionals and Consumers. A Report to the Standing Advisory Group on Consumer Involvement in the NHS R&D Programme. Manchester, UK: Policy Research in Engineering, Science and Technology (PREST), University of Manchester, 1998.
29. James P, Aitken P, Burns T. Research priorities for primary care mental health: a Delphi exercise. International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice, 2002; 8: 27-30.
30. Johanson R, Rigby C, Newburn M, Stewart M, Jones P. Suggestions in maternal and child health for the National Technology Assessment Programme: a consideration of consumer and professional priorities. The Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 2002; 122: 50-54.
31. Johnson MA, Wells SJ, Testa MF, McDonald J. Illinois's child welfare research agenda: an approach to building consensus for practice-based research. Child Welfare, 2003; 82: 53-75.
32. Jones R, Lamont T, Haines A. Setting priorities for research and development in the NHS: a case study on the interface between primary and secondary care. British Medical Journal, 1995; 311: 1076-1080.
33. Renvoize E, Patel J. Consumer voices steer the course of research. Journal of Dementia Care, 2002; 10: 37-38.
34. Whitehead WE, Wald A, Norton NJ. Priorities for treatment research from different professional perspectives. Gastroenterology, 2004; 126 (1 Suppl 1): S180-S185.
35. Zulu I, Schuman P, Musonda R et al. Priorities for antiretroviral therapy research in sub-Saharan Africa: a 2002 consensus conference in Zambia. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 2004; 36: 831-834.
36. Caron-Flinterman JF. A New Voice in Science: Patient Participation in Decision-making on Biomedical Research. PhD Thesis, Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit, 2005.
37. Oliver S, Armes DG, Gyte G. Public involvement in setting a national research agenda. Patient, 2009; 2: 179-190.
38. Staley K, Hanley B. Scoping Research Priority Setting with UK Clinical Research Organisations and Funders. London: James Lind Alliance, 2008.