Identifying Common Patient‐Oriented Priorities for Child and Adolescent Health Research and Care: A Systematic Review of Priority Setting Partnerships
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CONTEXT: James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) bring together patients, clinicians and carers (e.g., parents, guardians or family members) to identify the most important questions in specific areas of health research. The inclusion of diverse perspectives in PSPs can inform priority-guided investment in child health. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to explore top priority areas identified in JLA PSPs across a range of child health conditions. EVIDENCE REVIEW: This systematic review was designed to capture JLA PSPs conducted on health topics relevant to children and youth. Database searches were run in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and APA PsycINFO, and a grey literature search was conducted on the JLA's official website for reports published up to 1 August 2023. English-language articles adhering to, or adapting from, the JLA PSP methodology were eligible for inclusion if they focused on child and youth health, development and well-being. A thematic synthesis was conducted to explore common themes amongst all the top 10 lists. MAIN RESULTS: The systematic review identified 42 unique PSPs focused on child and youth health published from 2010 onwards. A total of 578 priorities were analysed across the top 10 priority lists. While the identified PSPs were conducted over a broad range of child health topic areas (e.g., general well-being, mental health, neurodevelopmental, and acute and chronic conditions), 18 common themes were identified across the top 10 priority lists. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our findings provide an overview of the JLA PSP process and common areas of interest in child health research. This study can guide health research funding, health system responsiveness and policymakers' actions for widescale improvement in child and youth health. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A person with lived experience who is also an expert in patient partnership and has been involved in multiple JLA PSPs was engaged as a compensated member of the project team. They were involved in the initial idea for the review, the design of the review question and methodology, the analysis and interpretation of the review findings, and co-authorship of the manuscript.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».