Top Ten Research Priorities for Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder Treatment

Jacobson et al. (2016) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

attention deficit

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

Europe - Sweden

Why was it conducted at all?

Moreover, research priorities are generally not set by a democratic process. Resources are usually awarded to research projects submitted to funding bodies by scientists (researcher initiated studies). Such a responsive mode of funding may overlook the views of the people affected by the condition in. question and is more appropriate for funding of basic science projects.

What was the objective?

to identify the ten most important research questions for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment as identified by people with ADHD together with personnel involved in the treatment of ADHD in school, health, and correction services

What was the outcome?

a ranking list of 10 research questions

How long did the research prioritization take?

1 day

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

JLA method

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: setting up PSP: establishing working group. Step 2: identifying unanswered question of concern: by reviewing treatment methods listed in SBU's report on ADHD, 39 uncertainties collected. Step 3: interim ranking: each member of working group independently selected ten most important uncertainties, 20 uncertainties with the most points compiled into shortlist. Step 4: final prioritization: workshop: small group discussions and small group rankings, followed by plenary discussion to achieve consensus

Which stakeholders took part?

Consumers (= those with ADHD and their close relatives), and school, health, and correctional services personnel. Interim ranking: 14 participants: 7 individuals with ADHD themselves and/or closely related to someone with ADHD (= parents with or without ADHS diagnosis), along with 7 professionals (2 psychologists, 1 psychiatrist, 1 primary care physician, 1 corrective services officer, 1 school counselor, and 1 specialist educator). Workshop: 6 consumers and 7 professionals.

How were stakeholders recruited?

No information provided.

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.