Preventing Stroke Research Priorities Project: An Initiative of Synergies to Prevent Stroke (STOPstroke)

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Seana Gall, Christine Farmer, Gemma Kitsos, Sabah Rehman, Hoang Phan, Seamus Barker, Brenda Booth, Amanda Thrift, Judith Katzenellenbogen, Mark Nelson, Timothy Kleinig, Valery Feigin, Dominique Cadilhac, Lee Nedkoff, Joosup Kim, Monique Kilkenny
{"title":"Preventing Stroke Research Priorities Project: An Initiative of Synergies to Prevent Stroke (STOPstroke)","authors":"Seana Gall,&nbsp;Christine Farmer,&nbsp;Gemma Kitsos,&nbsp;Sabah Rehman,&nbsp;Hoang Phan,&nbsp;Seamus Barker,&nbsp;Brenda Booth,&nbsp;Amanda Thrift,&nbsp;Judith Katzenellenbogen,&nbsp;Mark Nelson,&nbsp;Timothy Kleinig,&nbsp;Valery Feigin,&nbsp;Dominique Cadilhac,&nbsp;Lee Nedkoff,&nbsp;Joosup Kim,&nbsp;Monique Kilkenny","doi":"10.1155/hsc/9889724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Background:</b> Research priority setting projects provide a method to engage stakeholders in the prioritisation of research activities. We conducted a priority setting project to identify priorities for research into the primary and secondary prevention of stroke.</p><p><b>Methods:</b> A modified James Lind Alliance method was used for this project undertaken in Australia and New Zealand with two online surveys (September–November 2021 and May-June 2022) and an online workshop (August 2022). The main question addressed was ‘What question about preventing stroke would you like to see answered by researchers?’ Responses to Survey 1 were refined and reviewed to identify evidence uncertainties. Questions with uncertain evidence were presented in Survey 2 where participants rated the importance of questions. Quantitative analysis of the importance ratings identified highly rated questions. These questions were taken to the online workshop with two rounds of facilitated discussion to create a final list of priorities. A postworkshop evaluation questionnaire explored user’s perceptions of the process.</p><p><b>Results:</b> In Survey 1, 375 people proposed &gt; 700 research questions. These were refined to 134 questions that were checked against evidence with 47 determined to be unanswered and distributed for consideration in Survey 2. Respondents to Survey 2 (<i>n</i> = 97) rated 24 of the 47 questions highly that were then discussed in the online workshop (<i>n</i> = 16 participants). There was agreement on the most highly rated question ‘How can we improve early detection and measurement of stroke risk?’ but limited agreement on the remaining questions. Participants favoured keeping all questions but presenting them thematically. The final list includes 22 questions under behavioural; pharmacological/clinical; structural; policy; individual; population and secondary prevention themes. Participants rated the workshop experience as acceptable.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> A suite of research priorities for the primary and secondary prevention of stroke were identified by a broad range of stakeholders including people with lived experience of stroke, the public and health professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":48195,"journal":{"name":"Health & Social Care in the Community","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/hsc/9889724","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health & Social Care in the Community","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/hsc/9889724","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Research priority setting projects provide a method to engage stakeholders in the prioritisation of research activities. We conducted a priority setting project to identify priorities for research into the primary and secondary prevention of stroke.

Methods: A modified James Lind Alliance method was used for this project undertaken in Australia and New Zealand with two online surveys (September–November 2021 and May-June 2022) and an online workshop (August 2022). The main question addressed was ‘What question about preventing stroke would you like to see answered by researchers?’ Responses to Survey 1 were refined and reviewed to identify evidence uncertainties. Questions with uncertain evidence were presented in Survey 2 where participants rated the importance of questions. Quantitative analysis of the importance ratings identified highly rated questions. These questions were taken to the online workshop with two rounds of facilitated discussion to create a final list of priorities. A postworkshop evaluation questionnaire explored user’s perceptions of the process.

Results: In Survey 1, 375 people proposed > 700 research questions. These were refined to 134 questions that were checked against evidence with 47 determined to be unanswered and distributed for consideration in Survey 2. Respondents to Survey 2 (n = 97) rated 24 of the 47 questions highly that were then discussed in the online workshop (n = 16 participants). There was agreement on the most highly rated question ‘How can we improve early detection and measurement of stroke risk?’ but limited agreement on the remaining questions. Participants favoured keeping all questions but presenting them thematically. The final list includes 22 questions under behavioural; pharmacological/clinical; structural; policy; individual; population and secondary prevention themes. Participants rated the workshop experience as acceptable.

Conclusion: A suite of research priorities for the primary and secondary prevention of stroke were identified by a broad range of stakeholders including people with lived experience of stroke, the public and health professionals.

Abstract Image

预防中风研究优先项目:协同预防中风的倡议(STOPstroke)
背景:研究优先级设定项目提供了一种方法,使利益相关者参与研究活动的优先级。我们进行了一个优先级设置项目,以确定卒中一级和二级预防研究的优先级。方法:采用改进的James Lind联盟方法,在澳大利亚和新西兰进行两次在线调查(2021年9月至11月和2022年5月至6月)和一次在线研讨会(2022年8月)。主要的问题是“关于预防中风,你希望研究人员回答什么问题?”对调查1的回答进行了提炼和审查,以确定证据的不确定性。证据不确定的问题出现在调查2中,参与者对问题的重要性进行评级。定量分析的重要性评级确定了高评级的问题。这些问题被带到在线研讨会上进行了两轮促进讨论,以创建最终的优先事项清单。讲习班后的评价问卷探讨了用户对这一过程的看法。结果:在第1375项调查中,有375人提出了700个研究问题。这些问题被细化为134个问题,并根据证据进行了检查,其中47个问题被确定为未回答,并分发给调查2考虑。调查2的受访者(n = 97)对47个问题中的24个给予了高度评价,然后在在线研讨会上讨论(n = 16参与者)。在评价最高的问题“我们如何改善中风风险的早期检测和测量”上达成了一致?但在其余问题上的一致意见有限。参与者倾向于保留所有问题,但按主题提出问题。最终的清单包括22个问题:行为学;药理/临床;结构;政策;个体;人口和二级预防主题。参与者对工作坊的体验评价是可以接受的。结论:广泛的利益相关者,包括中风患者、公众和卫生专业人员,确定了卒中一级和二级预防的一套研究重点。
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
423
期刊介绍: Health and Social Care in the community is an essential journal for anyone involved in nursing, social work, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, general practice, health psychology, health economy, primary health care and the promotion of health. It is an international peer-reviewed journal supporting interdisciplinary collaboration on policy and practice within health and social care in the community. The journal publishes: - Original research papers in all areas of health and social care - Topical health and social care review articles - Policy and practice evaluations - Book reviews - Special issues
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信