Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method

Objectives: The objectives of this study is to review the set of criteria of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) for priority-setting in research with addition of new criteria if necessary, and to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of the final priority score. Methods: Based on the evalua...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Berra, Silvina, Sánchez, Emília, Pons, Joan M.V., Tebé, Cristian, Alonso Caballero, Jordi, Aymerich, Marta
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2010
País:España
Institución:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10256/7495
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10256/7495
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Serveis sanitaris-- Investigació
Health services research
id ES_d27f11dfe32c77d66e9127f64daaeceb
oai_identifier_str oai:recercat.cat:10256/7495
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated methodBerra, SilvinaSánchez, EmíliaPons, Joan M.V.Tebé, CristianAlonso Caballero, JordiAymerich, MartaServeis sanitaris-- InvestigacióHealth services researchObjectives: The objectives of this study is to review the set of criteria of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) for priority-setting in research with addition of new criteria if necessary, and to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of the final priority score. Methods: Based on the evaluation of 199 research topics, forty-five experts identified additional criteria for priority-setting, rated their relevance, and ranked and weighted them in a three-round modified Delphi technique. A final priority score was developed and evaluated. Internal consistency, test–retest and inter-rater reliability were assessed. Correlation with experts’ overall qualitative topic ratings were assessed as an approximation to validity. Results: All seven original IOM criteria were considered relevant and two new criteria were added (“potential for translation into practice”, and “need for knowledge”). Final ranks and relative weights differed from those of the original IOM criteria: “research impact on health outcomes” was considered the most important criterion (4.23), as opposed to “burden of disease” (3.92). Cronbach’s alpha (0.75) and test–retest stability (interclass correlation coefficient = 0.66) for the final set of criteria were acceptable. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for overall assessment of priority was 0.66. Conclusions: A reliable instrument for prioritizing topics in clinical and health services research has been developed. Further evaluation of its validity and impact on selecting research topics is requiredCambridge University Press2010info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10256/7495http://hdl.handle.net/10256/7495© International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2010, vol. 26, núm. 2, p. 217-224Articles publicats (D-CM)reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunyainstname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)Inglésinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1017/S0266462310000012info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/issn/0266-4623info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/1471-6348Tots els drets reservats. The published version is available at: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=7527608info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:recercat.cat:10256/74952026-05-29T05:05:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
title Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
spellingShingle Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
Berra, Silvina
Serveis sanitaris-- Investigació
Health services research
title_short Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
title_full Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
title_fullStr Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
title_full_unstemmed Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
title_sort Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Berra, Silvina
Sánchez, Emília
Pons, Joan M.V.
Tebé, Cristian
Alonso Caballero, Jordi
Aymerich, Marta
author Berra, Silvina
author_facet Berra, Silvina
Sánchez, Emília
Pons, Joan M.V.
Tebé, Cristian
Alonso Caballero, Jordi
Aymerich, Marta
author_role author
author2 Sánchez, Emília
Pons, Joan M.V.
Tebé, Cristian
Alonso Caballero, Jordi
Aymerich, Marta
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Serveis sanitaris-- Investigació
Health services research
topic Serveis sanitaris-- Investigació
Health services research
description Objectives: The objectives of this study is to review the set of criteria of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) for priority-setting in research with addition of new criteria if necessary, and to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of the final priority score. Methods: Based on the evaluation of 199 research topics, forty-five experts identified additional criteria for priority-setting, rated their relevance, and ranked and weighted them in a three-round modified Delphi technique. A final priority score was developed and evaluated. Internal consistency, test–retest and inter-rater reliability were assessed. Correlation with experts’ overall qualitative topic ratings were assessed as an approximation to validity. Results: All seven original IOM criteria were considered relevant and two new criteria were added (“potential for translation into practice”, and “need for knowledge”). Final ranks and relative weights differed from those of the original IOM criteria: “research impact on health outcomes” was considered the most important criterion (4.23), as opposed to “burden of disease” (3.92). Cronbach’s alpha (0.75) and test–retest stability (interclass correlation coefficient = 0.66) for the final set of criteria were acceptable. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for overall assessment of priority was 0.66. Conclusions: A reliable instrument for prioritizing topics in clinical and health services research has been developed. Further evaluation of its validity and impact on selecting research topics is required
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10256/7495
http://hdl.handle.net/10256/7495
url http://hdl.handle.net/10256/7495
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1017/S0266462310000012
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/issn/0266-4623
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/1471-6348
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cambridge University Press
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cambridge University Press
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv © International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2010, vol. 26, núm. 2, p. 217-224
Articles publicats (D-CM)
reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
instname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
instname_str Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
reponame_str Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
collection Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869420378051313664
score 15.228081

Similares en LA Referencia