National priority setting partnership using a Delphi consensus process to develop neonatal research questions suitable for practice-changing randomised trials in the UK
National priority setting partnership using a Delphi consensus process to develop neonatal research questions suitable for practice-changing randomised trials in the UK
Background: the provision of neonatal care is variable and commonly lacks adequate evidence base; strategic development of methodologically robust clinical trials is needed to improve outcomes and maximise research resources. Historically, neonatal research topics have been selected by researchers; prioritisation processes involving wider stakeholder groups have generally identified research themes rather than specific questions amenable to interventional trials.
Objective: to involve stakeholders including parents, healthcare professionals and researchers to identify and prioritise research questions suitable for answering in neonatal interventional trials in the UK.
Design: research questions were submitted by stakeholders in population, intervention, comparison, outcome format through an online platform. Questions were reviewed by a representative steering group; duplicates and previously answered questions were removed. Eligible questions were entered into a three-round online Delphi survey for prioritisation by all stakeholder groups.
Participants: one hundred and eight respondents submitted research questions for consideration; 144 participants completed round one of the Delphi survey, 106 completed all three rounds.
Results: two hundred and sixty-five research questions were submitted and after steering group review, 186 entered into the Delphi survey. The top five ranked research questions related to breast milk fortification, intact cord resuscitation, timing of surgical intervention in necrotising enterocolitis, therapeutic hypothermia for mild hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy and non-invasive respiratory support.
Conclusions: we have identified and prioritised research questions suitable for practice-changing interventional trials in neonatal medicine in the UK at the present time. Trials targeting these uncertainties have potential to reduce research waste and improve neonatal care.
health services research, neonatology, Delphi Technique, Humans, Health Personnel, Female, United Kingdom, Health Priorities, Research Design, Infant, Newborn
569-574
Evans, Katie
6f2af6ea-a608-40ff-8391-1ae5af04307e
Battersby, Cheryl
24ba455f-7f54-427c-8732-3007926ee5ce
Boardman, James P.
28ce9bba-1bff-40c3-968c-666d8a11b0dd
Boyle, Elaine
0a18aac0-3ba2-4463-a07c-f5957ed4ceb7
Carroll, Will
12ce4922-a72a-4b45-9ea1-27633196dc3f
Dinwiddy, Kate
70987b9f-9cb9-4bb2-89d0-3d56ee5d3752
Dorling, Jon
e55dcb9a-a798-41a1-8753-9e9ff8aab630
Gallagher, Katie
e8e964db-e6bd-468a-bf68-f35e3fd0d7bb
Hardy, Pollyanna
6a9c6df8-9e5b-4300-8fc7-03fed7b390bd
Johnston, Emma
850eeb51-7d5c-41f3-8a8a-1660d9a7ca76
Mactier, Helen
eb1043b6-9fa4-491e-861c-2491db247225
Marcroft, Claire
c7ce010c-e716-49d6-87c3-3fc7fd87eb11
Webbe, James William Harrison
b27a38fb-0cdf-4c1f-a8d1-6938b5caf9dc
Gale, Chris
210b7c81-9a39-460a-9ab3-54fe92a69f8e
November 2023
Evans, Katie
6f2af6ea-a608-40ff-8391-1ae5af04307e
Battersby, Cheryl
24ba455f-7f54-427c-8732-3007926ee5ce
Boardman, James P.
28ce9bba-1bff-40c3-968c-666d8a11b0dd
Boyle, Elaine
0a18aac0-3ba2-4463-a07c-f5957ed4ceb7
Carroll, Will
12ce4922-a72a-4b45-9ea1-27633196dc3f
Dinwiddy, Kate
70987b9f-9cb9-4bb2-89d0-3d56ee5d3752
Dorling, Jon
e55dcb9a-a798-41a1-8753-9e9ff8aab630
Gallagher, Katie
e8e964db-e6bd-468a-bf68-f35e3fd0d7bb
Hardy, Pollyanna
6a9c6df8-9e5b-4300-8fc7-03fed7b390bd
Johnston, Emma
850eeb51-7d5c-41f3-8a8a-1660d9a7ca76
Mactier, Helen
eb1043b6-9fa4-491e-861c-2491db247225
Marcroft, Claire
c7ce010c-e716-49d6-87c3-3fc7fd87eb11
Webbe, James William Harrison
b27a38fb-0cdf-4c1f-a8d1-6938b5caf9dc
Gale, Chris
210b7c81-9a39-460a-9ab3-54fe92a69f8e
Evans, Katie, Battersby, Cheryl, Boardman, James P., Boyle, Elaine, Carroll, Will, Dinwiddy, Kate, Dorling, Jon, Gallagher, Katie, Hardy, Pollyanna, Johnston, Emma, Mactier, Helen, Marcroft, Claire, Webbe, James William Harrison and Gale, Chris
(2023)
National priority setting partnership using a Delphi consensus process to develop neonatal research questions suitable for practice-changing randomised trials in the UK.
Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition, 108 (6), , [325504].
(doi:10.1136/archdischild-2023-325504).
Abstract
Background: the provision of neonatal care is variable and commonly lacks adequate evidence base; strategic development of methodologically robust clinical trials is needed to improve outcomes and maximise research resources. Historically, neonatal research topics have been selected by researchers; prioritisation processes involving wider stakeholder groups have generally identified research themes rather than specific questions amenable to interventional trials.
Objective: to involve stakeholders including parents, healthcare professionals and researchers to identify and prioritise research questions suitable for answering in neonatal interventional trials in the UK.
Design: research questions were submitted by stakeholders in population, intervention, comparison, outcome format through an online platform. Questions were reviewed by a representative steering group; duplicates and previously answered questions were removed. Eligible questions were entered into a three-round online Delphi survey for prioritisation by all stakeholder groups.
Participants: one hundred and eight respondents submitted research questions for consideration; 144 participants completed round one of the Delphi survey, 106 completed all three rounds.
Results: two hundred and sixty-five research questions were submitted and after steering group review, 186 entered into the Delphi survey. The top five ranked research questions related to breast milk fortification, intact cord resuscitation, timing of surgical intervention in necrotising enterocolitis, therapeutic hypothermia for mild hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy and non-invasive respiratory support.
Conclusions: we have identified and prioritised research questions suitable for practice-changing interventional trials in neonatal medicine in the UK at the present time. Trials targeting these uncertainties have potential to reduce research waste and improve neonatal care.
Text
569.full
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 3 April 2023
e-pub ahead of print date: 24 April 2023
Published date: November 2023
Additional Information:
Funding Information: CG is vice chair of the NIHR Research for Patient Benefit London Regional Advisory Panel and a member of the Glasgow Children’s Hospital Charity External Panel; he holds a Medical Research Council Transition Support Award. JPB is a member of the Wellcome Trust’s Career Development Award Panel and the Great Ormond Street Hospital Charity Research Assessment Panel. CB is the NIHR deputy chair of HTA prioritisation committee for hospitals. JD is a member of the NIHR HTA CET Funding Committee. CM is funded by HEE-NIHR Integrated Clinical Academic Programme and holds an NIHR ICA CSRF Fellowship.
Funding Information: administrative support for the project is provided by BAPM; questionnaire and online Delphi software are funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) through a Transition Support Award held by CG (MR/V036866/1).
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Keywords:
health services research, neonatology, Delphi Technique, Humans, Health Personnel, Female, United Kingdom, Health Priorities, Research Design, Infant, Newborn
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 485093
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/485093
ISSN: 1359-2998
PURE UUID: 00fdb88f-8d70-44f8-b963-01ac5c5de2a4
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 29 Nov 2023 17:35
Last modified: 21 Mar 2024 03:15
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Katie Evans
Author:
Cheryl Battersby
Author:
James P. Boardman
Author:
Elaine Boyle
Author:
Will Carroll
Author:
Kate Dinwiddy
Author:
Jon Dorling
Author:
Katie Gallagher
Author:
Pollyanna Hardy
Author:
Emma Johnston
Author:
Helen Mactier
Author:
Claire Marcroft
Author:
James William Harrison Webbe
Author:
Chris Gale
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics