CHNRI方法的二十年(2006-2025):追踪其演变及其对新兴的形态计量学领域的贡献。

IF 4.3 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Igor Rudan
{"title":"CHNRI方法的二十年(2006-2025):追踪其演变及其对新兴的形态计量学领域的贡献。","authors":"Igor Rudan","doi":"10.7189/jogh.15.01006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper tracks the evolution of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for setting health research priorities and situates it within a much broader, emerging field of 'ideometrics' - the quantitative study of how ideas can be generated, evaluated, and prioritised. First presented in 2006, the CHNRI method tackled three key barriers to research priority setting: an infinite number of possible research ideas, uncertainty about future payoffs of investing in research, and the need for a fair, transparent, legitimate, and broadly acceptable consensus. Its proposed solutions were based on the systematic nature of idea generation, explicit context framing, transparent criteria, and expert crowdsourcing, while its scores reflected 'collective optimism' towards many ideas that could be optionally weighted by funders and stakeholders. Early demonstrations of its usefulness were followed by the establishment of a landmark World Health Organization (WHO) programme that set priorities across the leading causes of global child mortality. The resulting publications catalysed adoption of the method by major agencies and many national governments. Within a decade, the CHNRI method became the most widely used approach to health research priority setting. The review of the first 50 exercises revealed its practical advantages: its systematic scope, transparency, inclusiveness, flexibility, simplicity, low cost, and publishable outputs. Its 'natural evolution' within the global health research community led most users to sensibly adapt its standard criteria to their specific contexts. Experiments on quantitative properties of human collective knowledge and opinion demonstrated accuracy within domains of expertise. They also showed that saturation of experts' collective opinion occurs with 45-55 scorers, achieving very stable rankings. Subsequent advances introduced bootstrapped confidence intervals, an information-theory expert agreement metric, and clustering analysis to detect scorer sub-structures, strengthening the method. Consultations with funders clarified 'funding attractiveness' as a complementary criterion, improving the method's policy traction. By the year 2025, the CHNRI method underpinned major exercises led by the leading international organisations in all of the world's regions, and supported research prioritisation in many challenging national and regional settings. A pivotal recent shift is the integration of artificial intelligence (AI)-based large language models: the CHNRI method can now accommodate AI as a partner in all steps of the priority-setting process. Moreover, years of CHNRI practice motivated a broader theoretical move: viewing the brain's 'perception of ideas' as an underappreciated human sense. These advances call for a more quantitative, testable, and replicable future developments in which the CHNRI method will contribute to 'ideometrics' - an emerging scientific field devoted to generating, evaluating and prioritising ideas that are likely to lead to human progress in health and beyond.</p>","PeriodicalId":48734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Health","volume":"15 ","pages":"01006"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12487843/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two decades of the CHNRI method (2006-2025): Tracking its evolution and contribution to the emerging field of ideometrics.\",\"authors\":\"Igor Rudan\",\"doi\":\"10.7189/jogh.15.01006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This paper tracks the evolution of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for setting health research priorities and situates it within a much broader, emerging field of 'ideometrics' - the quantitative study of how ideas can be generated, evaluated, and prioritised. First presented in 2006, the CHNRI method tackled three key barriers to research priority setting: an infinite number of possible research ideas, uncertainty about future payoffs of investing in research, and the need for a fair, transparent, legitimate, and broadly acceptable consensus. Its proposed solutions were based on the systematic nature of idea generation, explicit context framing, transparent criteria, and expert crowdsourcing, while its scores reflected 'collective optimism' towards many ideas that could be optionally weighted by funders and stakeholders. Early demonstrations of its usefulness were followed by the establishment of a landmark World Health Organization (WHO) programme that set priorities across the leading causes of global child mortality. The resulting publications catalysed adoption of the method by major agencies and many national governments. Within a decade, the CHNRI method became the most widely used approach to health research priority setting. The review of the first 50 exercises revealed its practical advantages: its systematic scope, transparency, inclusiveness, flexibility, simplicity, low cost, and publishable outputs. Its 'natural evolution' within the global health research community led most users to sensibly adapt its standard criteria to their specific contexts. Experiments on quantitative properties of human collective knowledge and opinion demonstrated accuracy within domains of expertise. They also showed that saturation of experts' collective opinion occurs with 45-55 scorers, achieving very stable rankings. Subsequent advances introduced bootstrapped confidence intervals, an information-theory expert agreement metric, and clustering analysis to detect scorer sub-structures, strengthening the method. Consultations with funders clarified 'funding attractiveness' as a complementary criterion, improving the method's policy traction. By the year 2025, the CHNRI method underpinned major exercises led by the leading international organisations in all of the world's regions, and supported research prioritisation in many challenging national and regional settings. A pivotal recent shift is the integration of artificial intelligence (AI)-based large language models: the CHNRI method can now accommodate AI as a partner in all steps of the priority-setting process. Moreover, years of CHNRI practice motivated a broader theoretical move: viewing the brain's 'perception of ideas' as an underappreciated human sense. These advances call for a more quantitative, testable, and replicable future developments in which the CHNRI method will contribute to 'ideometrics' - an emerging scientific field devoted to generating, evaluating and prioritising ideas that are likely to lead to human progress in health and beyond.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Global Health\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"01006\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12487843/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.15.01006\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.15.01006","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

摘要

这篇论文追踪了儿童健康和营养研究计划(CHNRI)设定健康研究优先级方法的演变,并将其置于一个更广泛的新兴领域“形态计量学”中——对想法如何产生、评估和确定优先级的定量研究。CHNRI方法首次提出于2006年,它解决了设定研究优先级的三个关键障碍:无数可能的研究思路、投资研究未来回报的不确定性,以及对公平、透明、合法和广泛可接受的共识的需求。它提出的解决方案是基于想法产生的系统性、明确的背景框架、透明的标准和专家众包,而它的分数反映了对许多想法的“集体乐观主义”,这些想法可以由资助者和利益相关者选择性地加权。在早期显示其有用性之后,世界卫生组织(世卫组织)制定了具有里程碑意义的方案,确定了全球儿童死亡主要原因的优先事项。由此产生的出版物促使主要机构和许多国家政府采用该方法。在十年内,CHNRI方法成为卫生研究优先事项设置中最广泛使用的方法。对前50项工作的审查显示了其实际优点:系统的范围、透明度、包容性、灵活性、简单性、低成本和可公布的产出。它在全球卫生研究界的“自然演变”导致大多数用户明智地使其标准标准适应他们的具体情况。对人类集体知识和意见的定量特性的实验证明了在专业领域内的准确性。他们还表明,专家集体意见的饱和发生在45-55分的得分者身上,获得了非常稳定的排名。随后的进展引入了自举置信区间、信息理论专家协议度量和聚类分析来检测评分子结构,从而加强了该方法。与资助者的磋商明确了“资金吸引力”作为一个补充标准,提高了该方法的政策吸引力。到2025年,CHNRI方法支持了世界所有地区的主要国际组织领导的主要工作,并支持了许多具有挑战性的国家和地区环境中的研究重点。最近的一个关键转变是基于人工智能(AI)的大型语言模型的集成:CHNRI方法现在可以在优先级设置过程的所有步骤中容纳AI作为合作伙伴。此外,多年的CHNRI实践激发了一个更广泛的理论举措:将大脑的“观念感知”视为一种未被充分认识的人类感官。这些进展需要一种更定量、可测试和可复制的未来发展,在这种发展中,CHNRI方法将为“形态计量学”做出贡献——这是一个新兴的科学领域,致力于产生、评估和优先考虑可能导致人类在健康及其他领域取得进步的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Two decades of the CHNRI method (2006-2025): Tracking its evolution and contribution to the emerging field of ideometrics.

This paper tracks the evolution of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for setting health research priorities and situates it within a much broader, emerging field of 'ideometrics' - the quantitative study of how ideas can be generated, evaluated, and prioritised. First presented in 2006, the CHNRI method tackled three key barriers to research priority setting: an infinite number of possible research ideas, uncertainty about future payoffs of investing in research, and the need for a fair, transparent, legitimate, and broadly acceptable consensus. Its proposed solutions were based on the systematic nature of idea generation, explicit context framing, transparent criteria, and expert crowdsourcing, while its scores reflected 'collective optimism' towards many ideas that could be optionally weighted by funders and stakeholders. Early demonstrations of its usefulness were followed by the establishment of a landmark World Health Organization (WHO) programme that set priorities across the leading causes of global child mortality. The resulting publications catalysed adoption of the method by major agencies and many national governments. Within a decade, the CHNRI method became the most widely used approach to health research priority setting. The review of the first 50 exercises revealed its practical advantages: its systematic scope, transparency, inclusiveness, flexibility, simplicity, low cost, and publishable outputs. Its 'natural evolution' within the global health research community led most users to sensibly adapt its standard criteria to their specific contexts. Experiments on quantitative properties of human collective knowledge and opinion demonstrated accuracy within domains of expertise. They also showed that saturation of experts' collective opinion occurs with 45-55 scorers, achieving very stable rankings. Subsequent advances introduced bootstrapped confidence intervals, an information-theory expert agreement metric, and clustering analysis to detect scorer sub-structures, strengthening the method. Consultations with funders clarified 'funding attractiveness' as a complementary criterion, improving the method's policy traction. By the year 2025, the CHNRI method underpinned major exercises led by the leading international organisations in all of the world's regions, and supported research prioritisation in many challenging national and regional settings. A pivotal recent shift is the integration of artificial intelligence (AI)-based large language models: the CHNRI method can now accommodate AI as a partner in all steps of the priority-setting process. Moreover, years of CHNRI practice motivated a broader theoretical move: viewing the brain's 'perception of ideas' as an underappreciated human sense. These advances call for a more quantitative, testable, and replicable future developments in which the CHNRI method will contribute to 'ideometrics' - an emerging scientific field devoted to generating, evaluating and prioritising ideas that are likely to lead to human progress in health and beyond.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信