Global Research Priorities for Social, Behavioural and Community Engagement Interventions for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health
For which topic were research priorities identified?
maternal, newborn and child health
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
Why was it conducted at all?
Social, behavioural and community engagement (SBCE) interventions are essential for global maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) strategies. Past efforts to synthesise research on SBCE interventions identified a need for clear priorities to guide future research. WHO led an exercise to identify global research priorities for SBCE interventions to improve MNCH.
What was the objective?
to identify global research priorities for social, behavioral and community engagement (SBCE) interventions to improve global maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH)
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 40 research topics
How long did the research prioritization take?
June 2015 - August 2018
Which methods were used to identify research priorities?
How were the priorities for research identified exactly?
Step 1: survey 1: collecting research priorities: participants were invited to propose up to three research priorities for one health area (either maternal or newborn or child health) that would be relevant for the current period to 2030, 867 priorities submitted: 333 for maternal health, 303 for newborn health and 231 for child health. Step 2: data processing: submissions compiled and thematically organized, resulting in list of 444 priorities. Step 3: survey 2: participants asked to score priorities: each participant was asked to score a subset of up to 30 research priorities against four pre-defined scoring criteria. Step 4: review of results by expert group, participants divided into sub-groups according to each of the four health areas, sub-groups were tasked with reviewing the top 30 ranked priorities to produce a top 10 list of research priorities for each area
Which stakeholders took part?
Researchers and program experts. Survey 1: 310 participants. Survey 2: 280 participants. Expert group: 37 researchers and 83 program experts.
How were stakeholders recruited?
Researchers and program experts were identified through database searches (PubMed and Web of Science), reference lists of relevant publications, web searches, professional networks and organization member lists. Experts were invited to participate via email. Experts were also encouraged to forward the invitation to other suitable experts.
Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?
Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.