Using Consensus Methods to Establish Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Research Priorities for Primary Care

Evans et al. (2004) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

primary care

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

Europe - United Kingdom

Why was it conducted at all?

The execution and incorporation of research into practice is influenced by the relevance and credibility of the work undertaken. Part of this process can be to identify priority research questions from the service provider perspective.

What was the objective?

to obtain a multidisciplinary consensus on priority research questions around the broad issue of prescribing in an inner London Primary Care Group locality

What was the outcome?

a ranking list of 6 research questions

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

Delphi; group discussion; workshop

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: group discussion with nominal group technique: participants were asked to discuss the question: What research questions on the effectiveness, cost and quality of prescribing should be given priority for support as research questions in this locality?, ideas recorded on flipcharts, participants were asked to vote by using 5 cards, resulting in 30 priority areas, number of priority research areas reduced to 16 during the clarification and amalgamation of ideas, results reviewed by steering group and six priority themes transformed to coherent research questions. Step 2: Delphi round 1: survey: participants were asked to rate each of the 6 research questions. Step 3: Delphi round 2: participants were asked to re-rate based on mean group ratings. Step 4: workshop: conducting literature search: participants compiled summary of published work on highest-ranking research questions

Which stakeholders took part?

General practice, primary care nursing and community pharmacy. Group discussion: 10 participants: 3 GPs, 3 community pharmacists, 2 practice nurses and 2 district nurses. Delphi: Delphi round 1: 47 participants, Delphi round 2: participants.: 34 participants. Workshop: 3 participants.

How were stakeholders recruited?

By recruiting from within one PCG, it was anticipated that the research questions would have direct relevance to the PCG, local service providers and users. Stage 1: A non-random convenience sample of 12 informants (all with a self identified interest in prescribing) from the local PCG were selected to participate in a nominal group interview. Four representatives were drawn from each of the three disciplines of general practice, primary care nursing and community pharmacy. Stage 2: A stratified random sampling technique was used. The sampling frame comprised 28 pharmacists, 100 GPs (20 single-handed), and 56 nurses (15 district nurses and 41 practice nurses).

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders not only participated but were also actively involved in the research prioritization process: They were part of a steering group.