Addressing barriers to global multidisciplinary stakeholder inclusivity: Lessons from global orofacial cleft research priority setting.

IF 4.5 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Niki Kouvroukoglou, Sanita Sandhu, Barbara Delage, Debbie Sell, Nicola Stock, Gareth Davies, Marina Campodonico, Bruce Richard, Zipporah Njeri Gathuya, Mekonen Eshete, Felicity V Mehendale
{"title":"Addressing barriers to global multidisciplinary stakeholder inclusivity: Lessons from global orofacial cleft research priority setting.","authors":"Niki Kouvroukoglou, Sanita Sandhu, Barbara Delage, Debbie Sell, Nicola Stock, Gareth Davies, Marina Campodonico, Bruce Richard, Zipporah Njeri Gathuya, Mekonen Eshete, Felicity V Mehendale","doi":"10.7189/jogh.14.04261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inclusivity in research priority setting is fundamental to capturing the opinion of all stakeholders in a research area. Globally, experienced healthcare workers often have deep insights that could impactfully shape future research, and a lack of their involvement in formal research and publications could mean that their voices are insufficiently represented. We aimed to modify the well-established Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to address barriers to inclusivity, which are particularly relevant in healthcare that requires highly multidisciplinary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This global research priority-setting exercise for orofacial clefts adapted the CHNRI methodology to include research experts, clinicians from multiple disciplines, and non-technical stakeholders (i.e. patients and parents and non-governmental organisations (NGOs)) on a global basis. A multidisciplinary international steering group proposed and discussed methodological changes to improve inclusivity, including survey edits, subgroups for research questions, a demographics section, translation in French and Spanish, phrasing adaptation, and alternative dissemination techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We received 412 responses and 1420 questions, spanning 78 different countries and 18 different specialties/groups. Challenges remain to improve representation of all groups, with the vast majority of answers (30%) being from surgeons and a comparatively small proportion from patient/parent groups (9%). This also includes managing responses in three languages, effective dissemination, and responses that were not worded as research questions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is one of the first CHNRI exercises to involve patients and parents, clinicians, and researchers in its first question submission stage, and the first ever to do so on a global scale. We describe our approach to addressing inclusivity challenges and report related demographic data to serve as a benchmark upon which we hope future CHNRI exercises will improve.</p>","PeriodicalId":48734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Health","volume":"14 ","pages":"04261"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636950/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.14.04261","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Inclusivity in research priority setting is fundamental to capturing the opinion of all stakeholders in a research area. Globally, experienced healthcare workers often have deep insights that could impactfully shape future research, and a lack of their involvement in formal research and publications could mean that their voices are insufficiently represented. We aimed to modify the well-established Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to address barriers to inclusivity, which are particularly relevant in healthcare that requires highly multidisciplinary care.

Methods: This global research priority-setting exercise for orofacial clefts adapted the CHNRI methodology to include research experts, clinicians from multiple disciplines, and non-technical stakeholders (i.e. patients and parents and non-governmental organisations (NGOs)) on a global basis. A multidisciplinary international steering group proposed and discussed methodological changes to improve inclusivity, including survey edits, subgroups for research questions, a demographics section, translation in French and Spanish, phrasing adaptation, and alternative dissemination techniques.

Results: We received 412 responses and 1420 questions, spanning 78 different countries and 18 different specialties/groups. Challenges remain to improve representation of all groups, with the vast majority of answers (30%) being from surgeons and a comparatively small proportion from patient/parent groups (9%). This also includes managing responses in three languages, effective dissemination, and responses that were not worded as research questions.

Conclusions: This is one of the first CHNRI exercises to involve patients and parents, clinicians, and researchers in its first question submission stage, and the first ever to do so on a global scale. We describe our approach to addressing inclusivity challenges and report related demographic data to serve as a benchmark upon which we hope future CHNRI exercises will improve.

解决全球多学科利益相关者包容性的障碍:来自全球口腔腭裂研究优先设置的经验教训。
背景:在确定研究重点的过程中,包容性是获取研究领域所有利益相关者意见的基础。在全球范围内,经验丰富的医护人员往往具有深刻的见解,能够对未来的研究产生影响,而他们在正式研究和出版物中的参与度不足可能意味着他们的意见没有得到充分反映。我们旨在修改行之有效的儿童健康与营养研究计划(CHNRI)方法,以解决包容性方面的障碍,这些障碍在需要高度多学科护理的医疗保健领域尤为重要:方法:这项针对口面裂隙的全球研究优先事项制定工作对 CHNRI 方法进行了调整,在全球范围内纳入了研究专家、多学科临床医生和非技术利益相关者(即患者和家长以及非政府组织 (NGO))。一个多学科国际指导小组提出并讨论了方法上的改变,以提高包容性,包括调查编辑、研究问题分组、人口统计部分、法文和西班牙文翻译、措辞调整和其他传播技术:我们收到了 412 份回复和 1420 个问题,涉及 78 个不同国家和 18 个不同专业/群体。提高所有群体的代表性仍面临挑战,绝大多数答复(30%)来自外科医生,来自患者/家长群体的比例相对较小(9%)。这还包括管理三种语言的答复、有效传播以及未作为研究问题措辞的答复:这是 CHNRI 首次让患者和家长、临床医生以及研究人员参与到首次问题提交阶段的活动之一,也是首次在全球范围内这样做。我们介绍了我们应对包容性挑战的方法,并报告了相关的人口统计数据,作为一个基准,我们希望未来的 CHNRI 活动能在此基础上有所改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Global Health
Journal of Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
240
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Global Health is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Edinburgh University Global Health Society, a not-for-profit organization registered in the UK. We publish editorials, news, viewpoints, original research and review articles in two issues per year.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信