Research Priorities for Improving Infant and Young Child Feeding in Humanitarian Emergencies

Prudhon et al. (2016) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

infant and young child feeding

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

international

Why was it conducted at all?

There are many challenges during emergencies to ensure that optimal infant and young child feeding is protected, promoted and supported, but there is a dearth of evidence on strategies and programmes to improve Infant and Young Child Feeding in Emergencies (IYCF-E) and a need to determine research priorities.

What was the objective?

to develop and prioritize a list of research questions on young child feeding interventions in emergencies

What was the outcome?

a ranking list of 10 research questions

How long did the research prioritization take?

December 2014 - March 2015

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

CHNRI approach

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: interviews with key informants: to develop research questions. Step 2: data processing: research questions developed on basis of themes arising from interviews. Step 3: criteria for scoring questions defined. Step 4: scoring questions: participants were asked to score each question

Which stakeholders took part?

NGOs, United Nations (UN) agencies, donor agencies and research institutions. Interviews: 46 participants: 27 people representing 14 NGOs, 5 people representing 4 un agencies, 4 donors representing 4 agencies and 10 people representing 9 research institutions. Survey: 27 participants.

How were stakeholders recruited?

Experts were identified by participation in key workshops on IYCF-E, and by recommendation of the interviewees. For the survey, people affiliated to Save the Children, the IFE core group, and universities actively involved in IYCF-E research were recruited.

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.