Prioritized Agenda for Mental Health Research in Pediatric Rheumatology from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Mental Health Workgroup

For which topic were research priorities identified?

pediatric rheumatology

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

North America - USA

Why was it conducted at all?

Mental health problems are prevalent in youth with rheumatologic disease. Gaps in knowledge exist regarding their impact, as well as strategies for detection and effective treatment. To address these gaps, the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Mental Health Workgroup developed and prioritized an agenda of research topics.

What was the objective?

to develop a prioritized research agenda to promote clinically relevant, important, and feasible research efforts that address gaps in knowledge related to mental health of youth with rheumatologic disease, and that are likely to lead to changes in practice and improvements in care

What was the outcome?

a list of 33 research topics

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?


How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: collecting research priorities: systematic review of literature on mental health in pediatric rheumatology. Step 2: data processing: taskforce developed list of 36 draft research topics based on main identified knowledge gaps, topics were then discussed, refined and revised, resulting in list of 33 refined research topics that fell within 5 research domains. Step 3: survey: participants were asked to rate each research topic along 3 questions, additionally participants were asked to provide an overall ranking of research topics within each research domain

Which stakeholders took part?

Carra mental health workgroup: pediatric rheumatologists, psychologists, social workers, patients, parents, research coordinator. 59 participants: majority pediatric rheumatologists from academic centers.

How were stakeholders recruited?

The survey was distributed to all members of the workgroup email listserv (n=103).

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.