Dyon Hoekstra, Margot Mütsch, Annegret Borchard, Christina Kien, Ursula Griebler, Erik Von Elm, Eva Rehfuess, Ansgar Gerhardus, Stefan K Lhachimi
{"title":"让利益相关者参与公共卫生系统性审查主题优先排序的结构化方法。","authors":"Dyon Hoekstra, Margot Mütsch, Annegret Borchard, Christina Kien, Ursula Griebler, Erik Von Elm, Eva Rehfuess, Ansgar Gerhardus, Stefan K Lhachimi","doi":"10.3389/ijph.2024.1606642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to develop and apply a structured approach for prioritising topics for systematic reviews in public health, framed according to the readily applicable PICO format, which encourages the involvement of stakeholders' preferences in a transparent matter.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a multi-stage process, consisting of a scoping and two Delphi stages with web-based surveys and invited public health stakeholders in Switzerland to participate: First, respondents specified topics for different public health domains, which were reformulated in a PICO format by content analysis. Second, respondents rated the topics using five stakeholder-refined assessment criteria. Overall rankings were calculated to assess differences between stakeholder groups and rating criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 215 respondents suggested 728 topics altogether. The response rate in the two Delphi stages was 91.6% and 77.6%, respectively. Most top-rated review topics focused on the effectiveness of interventions providing education to different target groups, followed by interventions to increase access to specific healthcare services.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our approach encourages involvement of stakeholders in identifying priorities for systematic reviews and highlights disparities between stakeholders and between individual criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":14322,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Health","volume":"69 ","pages":"1606642"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11371559/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Structured Approach to Involve Stakeholders in Prioritising Topics for Systematic Reviews in Public Health.\",\"authors\":\"Dyon Hoekstra, Margot Mütsch, Annegret Borchard, Christina Kien, Ursula Griebler, Erik Von Elm, Eva Rehfuess, Ansgar Gerhardus, Stefan K Lhachimi\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/ijph.2024.1606642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to develop and apply a structured approach for prioritising topics for systematic reviews in public health, framed according to the readily applicable PICO format, which encourages the involvement of stakeholders' preferences in a transparent matter.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a multi-stage process, consisting of a scoping and two Delphi stages with web-based surveys and invited public health stakeholders in Switzerland to participate: First, respondents specified topics for different public health domains, which were reformulated in a PICO format by content analysis. Second, respondents rated the topics using five stakeholder-refined assessment criteria. Overall rankings were calculated to assess differences between stakeholder groups and rating criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 215 respondents suggested 728 topics altogether. The response rate in the two Delphi stages was 91.6% and 77.6%, respectively. Most top-rated review topics focused on the effectiveness of interventions providing education to different target groups, followed by interventions to increase access to specific healthcare services.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our approach encourages involvement of stakeholders in identifying priorities for systematic reviews and highlights disparities between stakeholders and between individual criteria.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Health\",\"volume\":\"69 \",\"pages\":\"1606642\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11371559/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2024.1606642\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2024.1606642","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Structured Approach to Involve Stakeholders in Prioritising Topics for Systematic Reviews in Public Health.
Objectives: This study aimed to develop and apply a structured approach for prioritising topics for systematic reviews in public health, framed according to the readily applicable PICO format, which encourages the involvement of stakeholders' preferences in a transparent matter.
Methods: We developed a multi-stage process, consisting of a scoping and two Delphi stages with web-based surveys and invited public health stakeholders in Switzerland to participate: First, respondents specified topics for different public health domains, which were reformulated in a PICO format by content analysis. Second, respondents rated the topics using five stakeholder-refined assessment criteria. Overall rankings were calculated to assess differences between stakeholder groups and rating criteria.
Results: In total, 215 respondents suggested 728 topics altogether. The response rate in the two Delphi stages was 91.6% and 77.6%, respectively. Most top-rated review topics focused on the effectiveness of interventions providing education to different target groups, followed by interventions to increase access to specific healthcare services.
Conclusion: Our approach encourages involvement of stakeholders in identifying priorities for systematic reviews and highlights disparities between stakeholders and between individual criteria.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Public Health publishes scientific articles relevant to global public health, from different countries and cultures, and assembles them into issues that raise awareness and understanding of public health problems and solutions. The Journal welcomes submissions of original research, critical and relevant reviews, methodological papers and manuscripts that emphasize theoretical content. IJPH sometimes publishes commentaries and opinions. Special issues highlight key areas of current research. The Editorial Board''s mission is to provide a thoughtful forum for contemporary issues and challenges in global public health research and practice.