首页> 外文OA文献 >Identifying research priorities for public health research to address health inequalities: use of Delphi-like survey methods
【2h】

Identifying research priorities for public health research to address health inequalities: use of Delphi-like survey methods

机译:确定公共卫生研究的研究重点,以解决卫生不公平问题:使用类似Delphi的调查方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND:In the funding of health research and public health research it is vital that research questions posed are important and that funded research meets a research need or a gap in evidence. Many methods are used in the identification of research priorities, however, these can be resource intensive, costly and logistically challenging. Identifying such research priorities can be particularly challenging for complex public health problems as there is a need to consult a number of experts across disciplines and with a range of expertise. This study investigated the use of Delphi-like survey methods in identifying important research priorities relating to health inequalities and framing tractable research questions for topic areas identified.METHODS:The study was conducted in two phases, both using Delphi-like survey methods. Firstly, public health professionals with an interest in health inequalities were asked to identify research priorities. Secondly academic researchers were asked to frame tractable research questions relating to the priorities identified. These research priorities identified using Delphi-like survey methods were subsequently compared to those identified using different methods.RESULTS:A total of 52 public health professionals and 21 academics across the United Kingdom agreed to take part. The response rates were high, from public health professionals across three survey rounds (69%, 50% and 40%) and from academics across one round (52%), indicating that participants were receptive to the method and motivated to respond. The themes identified as encompassing the most important research priorities were mental health, healthy environment and health behaviours. Within these themes, the topic areas that emerged most strongly included community interventions for prevention of mental health problems and the food and alcohol environment. Some responses received from academic researchers were (as requested) in the form of tractable research questions, whereas others contributed further potential topic areas instead.CONCLUSIONS:Delphi-like survey methods are practical and productive as a means of obtaining opinions from a wide number of relevant experts identifying potential priority topic areas for research; however, this method is less appropriate for framing tractable research questions.
机译:背景:在卫生研究和公共卫生研究的资助中,至关重要的是要提出重要的研究问题,并且资助的研究必须满足研究需求或证据不足。在确定研究重点时使用了许多方法,但是这些方法可能会占用大量资源,成本高昂并且在后勤方面具有挑战性。对于复杂的公共卫生问题,确定此类研究重点可能尤其具有挑战性,因为需要咨询众多跨学科且具有广泛专业知识的专家。这项研究调查了使用德尔福式调查方法来确定与健康不平等有关的重要研究重点,并为确定的主题领域制定了易于处理的研究问题。方法:研究分两个阶段进行,都使用了德尔福式调查方法。首先,要求对健康不平等感兴趣的公共卫生专业人员确定研究重点。其次,要求学术研究人员对与确定的重点相关的易于研究的问题进行框架设计。随后将使用类似Delphi的调查方法确定的研究重点与使用不同方法确定的研究重点进行了比较。结果:英国共有52名公共卫生专业人员和21名学者同意参加。三轮调查(69%,50%和40%)的公共卫生专业人员和一轮学者(52%)的响应率都很高,表明参与者对这种方法很满意,并且积极地做出回应。被确定为涵盖最重要的研究重点的主题是心理健康,健康环境和健康行为。在这些主题中,最强烈出现的主题领域是社区干预措施,以预防心理健康问题以及食物和酒精环境。从学术研究人员那里收到的一些答复(按要求)是以易于处理的研究问题的形式提出的,而其他答复则是在其他潜在的主题领域做出了贡献。结论:类似德尔菲的调查方法既实用又有效,可以从众多有关专家确定潜在的优先研究领域;但是,这种方法不太适合用于框架易于处理的研究问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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