Research Priorities for Eight Areas of Adolescent Health in Low- And Middle-Income Countries
For which topic were research priorities identified?
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
Why was it conducted at all?
Improving the health of adolescents in LMICs will be essential for the world to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development goals, and the specific targets and goals included in the United Nations Secretary General's Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescents' Health. Although there has been an increased call for research on the health and wellbeing of adolescents and young people to guide these and other global and national initiatives, research from LMICs is still limited.
What was the objective?
to identify research priorities for eight areas of adolescent health in low- and middle-income countries
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 10 research questions
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: identifying research and program experts through literature review and interviews with key informants. Step 2: participants were asked to propose research questions. Step 3: data processing: 512 questions submitted, synthesized into 303 questions. Step 4: experts were asked to score each research question based on five criteria
Which stakeholders took part?
Research and program experts. 142 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
Experts were identified through journal publications, membership of journal editorial boards, from lists of participants at WHO meetings and consultations, and by nominations from relevant WHO departments. The project team also identified participants at WHO meetings and consultations held in 2010 to 2015 and that were relevant to the eight adolescent health areas through reports. 450 experts were identified.
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.