34: Priority Setting in Pediatric Preventive Care Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients and clinicians may have different priorities than health researchers. Providing patients, parents and clinicians a voice in selecting and prioritizing research topics is important in setting the research agenda for child health. To identify the most important unanswered research questions in pediatric preventive care from the perspective of parents and clinicians, and to identify whether differences exist between questions submitted by parents and clinicians. Based on the James Lind Alliance's Priority Setting Partnerships protocol, an online questionnaire was circulated to parents of children aged 0 to 5 years enrolled in a primary care practice-based research network, and to pediatricians and family physicians in the Ontario Medical Association. The questionnaire used one open-ended question and eight questions about specific domains to ask respondents to submit the most important research questions in pediatric preventive care. Similar submissions were combined into indicative questions through a consensus-building process. Unanswered indicative questions were identified by reviewing existing guidelines and multiple databases to determine if a relevant systematic review or high-quality trial exists. Fisher's exact test was used to identify statistically significant differences between the responses of parents and clinicians. Respondents included 42 clinicians and 102 parents, who submitted a total of 239 and 765 questions about pediatric preventive care, respectively. Most submissions pertained to nutrition and obesity (20.1% for clinicians, 18.3% for parents), illness prevention (19.2% and 17.2%) and parenting and behaviour (16.3% and 15.2%). Parents were more likely to ask questions about screen time (8.0% of parent submissions vs 4.6% of clinician submissions, P<0.05) and sleep (8.7% vs 6.3%, P<0.05) than clinicians. Of the original questions, 148 clinician questions (61.9%) and 397 parent questions (51.9%) were unanswered. These were combined into 79 indicative questions. The most frequently endorsed questions included discipline strategies, the impact of electronic devices on development, and interventions to promote healthy sleep. There was general agreement between parent and clinician research priorities. The 79 indicative questions will go through final priority setting steps with parents and clinicians, using the nominal group technique to attain consensus on the top 10 unanswered research questions in pediatric preventive care. Identifying the research priorities of parents and clinicians is important in advancing the care of children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.443 | 0.437 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".