...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Epidemiology >An equity lens can ensure an equity-oriented approach to agenda setting and priority setting of Cochrane Reviews
【24h】

An equity lens can ensure an equity-oriented approach to agenda setting and priority setting of Cochrane Reviews

机译:平等视角可以确保以公平为本的方式来制定Cochrane评价的议程和优先次序

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: This study aimed to develop and pilot an equity lens that could help researchers in developing a more equity-oriented approach toward priority setting and agenda setting in systematic reviews. Study Design and Setting: We developed an equity lens to guide the development and evaluation of a prioritization process and evaluate its outcomes based on the information derived from a discussion workshop and a comparison with the existing literature on the topic. We piloted the process section of the equity lens across the 13 structured priority-setting approaches in the Cochrane Collaboration. Results: We devised an equity lens with two checklists: one to guide the process of priority setting (nine questions) and the other to evaluate the outcomes of priority setting (eight questions). Of the nine questions, seven questions were partially addressed by at least one of the prioritization projects. Two questions were not considered in any of them. The prioritization projects did not report sufficient outcome data, thus we could not explore the eight question on evaluating outcomes. Conclusion: Currently, there are few strategies in the Cochrane Collaboration that explicitly address the research priorities of individuals from different sociodemographic groups. The equity lens for priority setting and agenda setting can help project teams to develop a more equity-oriented approach to set a research agenda and/or prioritize research topics. However, further studies are needed to evaluate its impact on the prioritization process.
机译:目标:这项研究旨在开发和试行公平的视角,以帮助研究人员针对系统评价中的优先顺序设置和议程设置开发更加公平的方法。研究设计和设置:我们开发了一个公平的视角来指导优先级排序过程的开发和评估,并根据从讨论会获得的信息以及与该主题的现有文献进行比较来评估其结果。我们在Cochrane合作中采用了13种结构化的优先级确定方法,试行了股权视角的过程部分。结果:我们设计了一个具有两个清单的公平视角:一个清单用于指导优先级设置过程(九个问题),另一个清单用于评估优先级设置的结果(八个问题)。在这九个问题中,至少一个优先项目之一部分解决了七个问题。他们两个都没有考虑两个问题。优先项目没有报告足够的结果数据,因此我们无法探讨有关评估结果的八个问题。结论:目前,Cochrane合作组织中很少有策略能够明确解决来自不同社会人口学群体的个人的研究重点。优先级设置和议程设置的公平视角可以帮助项目团队开发更加公平的方法来设置研究议程和/或确定研究主题的优先级。但是,需要进一步研究以评估其对优先级排序过程的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号