Dataset Information

What are the research priorities for idiopathic intracranial hypertension? A priority setting partnership between patients and healthcare professionals.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is under-researched and the aim was to determine the top 10 research priorities for this disease.

Design

A modified nominal group technique was used to engage participants who had experience of IIH.

Setting

This James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership was commissioned by IIH UK, a charity.

Participants

People with IIH, carers, family and friends, and healthcare professionals participated in two rounds of surveys to identify unique research questions unanswered by current evidence. The most popular 26 uncertainties were presented to stakeholders who then agreed the top 10 topics.

Results

The top 10 research priorities for IIH included aetiology of IIH, the pathological mechanisms of headache in IIH, new treatments in IIH, the difference between acute and gradual visual loss, the best ways to monitor visual function, biomarkers of the disease, hormonal causes of IIH, drug therapies for the treatment of headache, weight loss and its role in IIH and finally, the best intervention to treat IIH and when should surgery be performed.

Conclusions

This priority setting encouraged people with direct experience of IIH to collectively identify critical gaps in the existing evidence. The overarching research aspiration was to understand the aetiology and management of IIH.

SUBMITTER: Mollan S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6429891 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What are the research priorities for idiopathic intracranial hypertension? A priority setting partnership between patients and healthcare professionals.

Mollan Susan S Hemmings Krystal K Herd Clare P CP Denton Amanda A Williamson Shelley S Sinclair Alexandra J AJ

BMJ open 20190315 3

<h4>Objective</h4>Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is under-researched and the aim was to determine the top 10 research priorities for this disease.<h4>Design</h4>A modified nominal group technique was used to engage participants who had experience of IIH.<h4>Setting</h4>This James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership was commissioned by IIH UK, a charity.<h4>Participants</h4>People with IIH, carers, family and friends, and healthcare professionals participated in two rounds of s ...[more]

PMID: 30878991

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify research priorities for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy from individuals with lived experience and healthcare professionals.DesignProspective surveys and consensus meetings using principles outlined by the James Lind Alliance.SettingUK.MethodsA steering group was established and 'uncertainties' were gathered using an online survey and literature search. An interim online survey ranked long-listed questions and the top 10 research questions were reached by consensus at a final prioritisation workshop.ParticipantsWomen, partners, relatives and friends of those with lived experience of pregnancy hypertension, researchers and healthcare professionals.ResultsThe initial online survey was answered by 278 participants (180 women with lived experience, 9 partners/relatives/friends, 71 healthcare professionals and 18 researchers). Together with a literature search, this identified 764 questions which were refined into 50 summary questions. All summary questions were presented in an interim prioritisation survey that was answered by 155 participants (87 women with lived experience, 4 partners/relatives/friends, 49 healthcare professionals and 15 researchers). The top 25 highest ranked questions were considered by the final prioritisation workshop. The top 10 uncertainties were identified by consensus and ranked as follows in order of priority: long-term consequences of pregnancy hypertension (for the woman and baby), short-term complications of pregnancy hypertension (for the woman and baby), screening tests for pre-eclampsia, prevention of long-term problems (for the woman and baby), causes of pregnancy hypertension, prevention of recurrent pregnancy hypertension, educational needs of healthcare professionals, diagnosis of pre-eclampsia, management of pregnancy hypertension, provision of support for women and families.ConclusionsResearch priorities shared by those with lived experience of pregnancy hypertension and healthcare professionals have been identified. Researchers should use these to inform the choice of future studies in this area.

Project description:ObjectivesAutosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common inherited kidney condition, accounting for 7%-10% of patients with kidney failure. Fundamental basic science and clinical research on ADPKD is underway worldwide but no one has yet considered which areas should be prioritised to maximise returns from limited future funding. The Polycystic Kidney Disease Charity began a priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance (JLA) in the UK in 2019-2020 to identify areas of uncertainty in the ADPKD care pathway and allow patients, carers and healthcare professionals to rank the 10 most important questions for research.DesignThe scope covered ADPKD diagnosis and management, identifying new treatments to prevent/slow disease progression and practical, integrated patient support (https://pkdcharity.org.uk/research/for-researchers/adpkd-research-priorities). We used adapted JLA methodology. Initially, an independent information specialist collated uncertainties in ADPKD care from recent consensus conference proceedings and additional literature. These were refined into indicative questions with Steering Group oversight. Finally, the 10 most important questions were established via a survey and online consensus workshop.SettingUK.Participants747 survey respondents (76% patients, 13% carers, 11% healthcare professionals); 23 workshop attendees.Results117 uncertainties in ADPKD care were identified and refined into 35 indicative questions. A shortlist of 17 questions was established through the survey. Workshop participants reached agreement on the top 10 ranking. The top three questions prioritised by patients, carers and healthcare professionals centred around slowing disease progression, identifying persons for early treatment and organising care to improve outcomes.ConclusionsOur shortlist reflects the varied physical, psychological and practical challenges of living with and treating ADPKD, and perceived gaps in knowledge that impair optimal care. We propose that future ADPKD research funding takes these priorities into account to focus on the most important areas and to maximise improvements in ADPKD outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundA recent Lancet commission called for more research on palliative care in low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries such as Colombia. A research priority setting approach has been recommended by The Global Forum for Health Research to address the huge gap in research output between LMIC and high-income countries, with influential health service bodies recommending the active involvement of non-research expert stakeholders in establishing research priorities to address service user needs.MethodPriority setting partnership (PSP) following the four stages of the James Lind Alliance methodology; establishing the partnership, identifying evidence uncertainties, refining questions and uncertainties, and prioritization. Data from MS forms were analysed using descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 33 stakeholders attended an online PSP workshop and completed the Mentimeter exercise in Microsoft Teams. A total of 48 attended the subsequent in person prioritisation exercise in urban Bogota (n = 22) and rural Popayan (n = 25). The stakeholders were a diverse group of health professionals (physicians, medical students, nurses, dentists, physiotherapists, nutritionist, occupational and speech therapists), financial and administrative staff and patients with life-limiting illness and caregivers. Top research priorities included patient and caregiver needs, service provider education and training, and better integration of palliative care with cancer and non-cancer services. The key challenges included a lack of interest in palliative care research, along with funding, time and resource constraints. Key solutions included collaboration across disciplines and settings, highlighting benefits of palliative research to help secure adequate resources, and multicentre, mixed method research, with patient involvement from the research development stage.ConclusionThe findings of this PSP should be disseminated among palliative care associations worldwide to inform international multicentre studies, and among governmental and nongovernmental organisations that promote research in Colombia. A focus on patient and family caregiver palliative care needs in Colombia should be prioritised.

Project description:BackgroundIt has been suggested that the research priorities of those funding and performing research in transplantation may differ from those of end service users such as patients, carers and healthcare professionals involved in day-to-day care. The Kidney Transplant Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established with the aim of involving all stakeholders in prioritising future research in the field.MethodsThe PSP methodology is as outlined by the James Lind Alliance. An initial survey collected unanswered research questions from patients, carers and clinicians. Duplicate and out-of-scope topics were excluded and the existing literature searched to identify topics answered by current evidence. An interim prioritisation survey asked patients and professionals to score the importance of the remaining questions to create a ranked long-list. These were considered at a final consensus workshop using a modified nominal group technique to agree a final top ten.ResultsThe initial survey identified 497 questions from 183 respondents, covering all aspects of transplantation from assessment through to long-term follow-up. These were grouped into 90 unanswered "indicative" questions. The interim prioritisation survey received 256 responses (34.8% patients/carers, 10.9% donors and 54.3% professionals), resulting in a ranked list of 25 questions that were considered during the final workshop. Participants agreed a top ten priorities for future research that included optimisation of immunosuppression (improved monitoring, choice of regimen, personalisation), prevention of sensitisation and transplanting the sensitised patient, management of antibody-mediated rejection, long-term risks to live donors, methods of organ preservation, induction of tolerance and bioengineering of organs. There was evidence that patient and carer involvement had a significant impact on shaping the final priorities.ConclusionsThe final list of priorities relates to all stages of the transplant process, including access to transplantation, living donation, organ preservation, post-transplant care and management of the failing transplant. This list of priorities will provide an invaluable resource for researchers and funders to direct future activity.

Dataset Information

What are the research priorities for idiopathic intracranial hypertension? A priority setting partnership between patients and healthcare professionals.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

What are the research priorities for idiopathic intracranial hypertension? A priority setting partnership between patients and healthcare professionals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets