Research Priorities in Pediatric Asthma: Results of a Global Survey of Multiple Stakeholder Groups by the Pediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL) Think Tank
For which topic were research priorities identified?
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
Why was it conducted at all?
Pediatric asthma remains a public health challenge with enormous impact worldwide. Although undoubtedly asthma in children and adults has major differences, with diverging mechanisms and triggers, different diagnostics challenges, outcomes, and response to treatments, pediatric asthma is very often approached as an extension of adult asthma. Characteristically, concepts and recommendations are predominantly based on data extrapolated from clinical research studies conducted in adults.2,8 This is engendered by a lack of high-quality interventional, but also epidemiological, pathophysiological, and immunological studies evaluating asthma in childhood. Shortage of data results from ethical and regulatory constraints in conducting research in children and from the relatively lenient criteria for the extension of adult asthma drug licenses to children. Pediatric Asthma in Real Life (PeARL), a think tank led by international clinical researchers in Pediatric Asthma initiated by the Respiratory Effectiveness Group, was developed to address this deficit. Its vision is to develop consensus and recommendations that will improve patient care and limit the disease burden, by capturing and evaluating currently available, clinically relevant evidence, as well as crowdsourcing international expertise on pediatric asthma.
What was the objective?
to identify and prioritize unmet clinical needs in pediatric asthma, which could be used to guide future research and policy activities
What was the outcome?
a list of 57 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: survey 1: participants were asked to list important unanswered, clinically relevant questions in nine categories. Step 2: data processing: review of responses, duplicates combined, rewriting submissions into questions, resulting in 57 unique important unanswered clinical questions in pediatric asthma identified. Step 3: survey 2: participants were asked to select the most salient unmet needs that could have direct clinical impact on pediatric asthma
Which stakeholders took part?
International experts in pediatric asthma, researchers, clinicians treating pediatric asthma, patients and their caregivers, representatives of policymakers, regulators, and the pharmaceutical industry. 26 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
Researchers were identified through systematic searches of Scopus; the other stakeholder categories were self-reported by the respondents of the survey.
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.