Outcome prioritization and preferences among older adults with cancer starting chemotherapy in a randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults with cancer facing competing treatments must prioritize between various outcomes. This study assessed health outcome prioritization among older adults with cancer starting chemotherapy. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial addressing vulnerabilities in older adults with cancer. Patients completed three validated outcome prioritization tools: 1) Health Outcomes Tool: prioritizes outcomes (survival, independence, symptoms) using a visual analog scale; 2) Now vs. Later Tool: rates the importance of quality of life at three times-today versus 1 or 5 years in the future; and 3) Attitude Scale: rates agreement with outcome-related statements. The authors measured the proportion of patients prioritizing various outcomes and evaluated their characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 219 patients (median [range] age 71 [65-88], 68% with metastatic disease) were included. On the Health Outcomes Tool, 60.7% prioritized survival over other outcomes. Having localized disease was associated with choosing survival as top priority. On the Now vs. Later Tool, 50% gave equal importance to current versus future quality of life. On the Attitude Scale, 53.4% disagreed with the statement "the most important thing to me is living as long as I can, no matter what my quality of life is"; and 82.2% agreed with the statement "it is more important to me to maintain my thinking ability than to live as long as possible". CONCLUSION: Although survival was the top priority for most participants, some older individuals with cancer prioritize other outcomes, such as cognition and function. Clinicians should elicit patient-defined priorities and include them in decision-making.

A Framework for Future Analysis of Ophthalmology Fellowships in Iran: Call for Action, Implications and Recommendations.

Ophthalmology fellowship is focusing on the educational advancement, medical research progress and academic productivity by transforming general ophthalmologists into superior clinical capacities in ophthalmology. There is a vast majority of ophthalmologists who wish to undertake fellowship degrees. The fellowship programs have several benefits for ophthalmologists and medical institutions. However, the expansion of ophthalmic fellowships has resulted in a greater number of ophthalmology visits, the possibility of unnecessary subspecialty eye examinations, induced demand and increasing eye-care costs. Moreover, sub-specialized ophthalmic services are not accessible to patients in remote regions. This can lead to a degree of inequity in the provision of healthcare services in the healthcare system. The massive expansion of fellowships in ophthalmology is revitalizing the necessity for evaluation of the need for post-residency education and providing effective planning for the future of the ophthalmic human-resource for eye health. This narrative review includes an integration and descriptive summary of the existing evidence on trends and different aspects that affect the future of ophthalmic fellowship education. Moreover, we pinpointed challenges such as maintaining standards in fellowship education, keeping an efficient production of graduates, and improving productivity in both patient care and education. We explored potential solutions to overcome these challenges. The 7-step framework for future analysis suggested here includes Determining educational needs and desired outcomes, Evaluating the current status of fellowship education, determining the gaps, and appropriate solutions, analyzing possible future trends and their impact on ophthalmology practice, investing in virtual educational technology, developing new educational horizons by foresight expert panels, and human-resource planning.

Tailored wastewater surveillance framework uncovered the epidemics of key pathogens in a Northwestern city of China.

Wastewater surveillance enables rapid pathogen monitoring and community prevalence estimation. However, how to design an integrated and tailored wastewater surveillance framework to monitor major health threats in metropolises remains a major challenge. In this study, we first analyzed the historical clinical data of Xi'an city and designed a wastewater surveillance framework covering five key endemic viruses, namely, SARS-CoV-2, norovirus, influenza A virus (IAV), influenza B virus (IBV), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and hantavirus. Amplicon sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, norovirus and hantavirus was conducted biweekly to determine the prevalent community genotypes circulating in this region. The results showed that from April 2023 to August 2023, Xi'an experienced two waves of SARS-CoV-2 infection, which peaked in the middle of May-2023 and late August-2023. The sewage concentrations of IAV and RSV peaked in early March and early May 2023, respectively, while the sewage concentrations of norovirus fluctuated throughout the study period and peaked in late August. The dynamics of the sewage concentrations of SARS-CoV-2, norovirus, IAV, RSV, and hantavirus were in line with the trends in the sentinel hospital percent positivity data, indicating the role of wastewater surveillance in enhancing the understanding of epidemic trends. Amplicon sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 revealed a transition in the predominant genotype, which changed from DY.1 and FR.1.4 to the XBB and EG.5 subvariants. Amplicon sequencing also revealed that there was only one predominant hantavirus genotype in the local population, while highly diverse genotypes of norovirus GI and GII were found in the wastewater. In conclusion, this study provided valuable insights into the dynamics of infection trends and predominant genotypes of key pathogens in a city without sufficient clinical surveillance, highlighting the role of a tailored wastewater surveillance framework in addressing public health priorities. More importantly, our study provides the first evidence demonstrating the applicability of wastewater surveillance for hantavirus, which is a major health threat locally.

Public health priorities for the Gulf states.

The newly established Gulf Center for Disease Prevention and Control (Gulf CDC) has to identify priorities to tackle in the first 2 years of operation. A rapid situational assessment involving a selected sample of national stakeholders, an objective study of the strengths and gaps in the national public health programmes and a study estimating the burden of the main disease/risk factors were carried out. The findings of an objective ranking survey, followed by consensus discussion in an in-person meeting for senior Gulf states' experts, were combined with the evidence available from the previous three studies to result in a short list of the most pressing priority topics for the Gulf CDC to tackle. Both communicable (lead priorities: antimicrobial resistance and immunisation) and non-communicable diseases (leads: cardiovascular disease, then cancer, diabetes, and mental health) are the consensus priorities. Also, the risks associated with non-communicable diseases (high BMI, blood sugar, high blood pressure) and unhealthy lifestyle (poor diet, low physical activity and tobacco use) were also highlighted as top priorities to tackle.

The Intersections of COVID-19 Global Health Governance and Population Health Priorities: Equity-Related Lessons Learned From Canada and Selected G20 Countries.

Background: COVID-19-related global health governance (GHG) processes and public health measures taken influenced population health priorities worldwide. We investigated the intersection between COVID-19-related GHG and how it redefined population health priorities in Canada and other G20 countries. We analysed a Canada-related multilevel qualitative study and a scoping review of selected G20 countries. Findings show the importance of linking equity considerations to funding and accountability when responding to COVID-19. Nationalism and limited coordination among governance actors contributed to fragmented COVID-19 public health responses. COVID-19-related consequences were not systematically negative, but when they were, they affected more population groups living and working in conditions of vulnerability and marginalisation. Policy options and recommendations: Six policy options are proposed addressing upstream determinants of health, such as providing sufficient funding for equitable and accountable global and public health outcomes and implementing gender-focused policies to reduce COVID-19 response-related inequities and negative consequences downstream. Specific programmatic (e.g., assessing the needs of the community early) and research recommendations are also suggested to redress identified gaps. Conclusion: Despite the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, programmatic and research opportunities along with concrete policy options must be mobilised and implemented without further delay. We collectively share the duty to act upon global health justice.

COVID-19 vaccination plans in Latin America and the Caribbean: a multi-country comparative analysis of prioritization strategies.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to synthesize and compare the prioritization strategies outlined in the national vaccination plans (NVPs) against Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) developed by countries in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a comparative policy analysis based on COVID-19 NVPs. METHODS: We conducted a search strategy in three stages to identify NVPs for COVID-19 across 41 countries/territories in the LAC region. Sources included official governmental repositories, complementary Google searches, and less formal documentation. We extracted key variables and conducted a comparative policy analysis based on the prioritization criteria and specific prioritization groups. RESULTS: The study identified 52 NVPs for COVID-19, corresponding to 27 (65.8 %) out of 41 countries/territories in the LAC region. Official national websites yielded documents for 12 countries. All NVPs included frontline healthcare personnel in the first prioritization phase/stage, whilst some included residents of long-term healthcare facilities, adults aged 60 years or more, and people with disabilities. The decision criteria for prioritization were declared in 14 countries/territories. Ethical considerations declared in five NVPs included human welfare, equality, solidarity, equity, and social justice as values. CONCLUSION: The early stages of vaccination rollout in LAC countries prioritized protection of the healthcare system and epidemiological risk for severe disease. Few countries included ethical considerations in their NVPs, and global inequities in vaccine access and distribution led to varied protections for vulnerable populations across LAC. This analysis highlights the need for improved emergency-response capacity, planning, and enhanced multilateral cooperation in the LAC region for future public health emergencies.

Associations Between Sociodemographic Variables, Social Determinants of Health, and Diabetes: Findings From a Congregational Health Needs Assessment.

PURPOSE: To examine associations between sociodemographic variables, social determinants of health (SDOHs) and diabetes using health needs assessment data. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Faith-based communities in the Mid-South U.S. SAMPLE: Of the 378 churches, 92 participated in the study (24% response rate); N = 828 church leaders and members completed the survey. MEASURE: The Mid-South Congregational Health Survey assessed perceived health-related needs of congregations and the communities they serve. ANALYSIS: Generalized linear mixed modeling examined the associations between sociodemographic variables (age, sex, race/ethnicity, educational level), SDOHs (affordable healthcare, healthy food, employment), and diabetes. RESULTS: Individuals with less education had lower odds of reporting all SDOHs as health needs compared to individuals with more education (ORrange = .59-.63). Men had lower odds of reporting diabetes as a health need or concern compared to women (OR = .70; 95% CI = .50, .97). African Americans had greater odds of reporting diabetes as a health need compared to individuals in the 'Other' race/ethnicity category (OR = 3.91; 95% CI = 2.20, 6.94). Individuals who reported affordable healthcare (OR = 2.54; 95% CI = 1.73, 3.72), healthy food (OR = 2.24; 95% CI = 1.55, 3.24), and employment (OR = 3.33; 95% CI = 2.29, 4.84) as health needs had greater odds of reporting diabetes as a health need compared to those who did not report these SDOHs as needs. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies should evaluate strategies to merge healthcare and faith-based organizations' efforts to address SDOHs impacting diabetes.

"I want to see them thrive!": exploring health service research priorities for young Aboriginal children growing up in Alice Springs - a qualitative study.

To better understand the specific influences of early life on the long-term health and well-being of local Aboriginal children in Alice Springs, high-quality local longitudinal data is required. The Central Australian Aboriginal Congress and the Murdoch Children's Research Institute are exploring the feasibility of establishing a cohort study to fill this gap. A nested qualitative study was conducted to identify priority issues that can be translated into research questions answerable through the proposed cohort study. Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with a range of key community stakeholders, parents and caregivers of young Aboriginal children from Alice Springs in the Northern Territory between 2020 and 2021. Two Aboriginal and two non-Aboriginal researchers conducted 27 interviews and 3 FGDs with 42 participants. Three broad themes were constructed through reflexive thematic analysis representing the areas of focus community stakeholders and parents want future research to prioritise: (1) social determinants of health (2) building positive connections, and (3) making sure kids grow up strong and healthy. Priority setting for future research should be driven by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in order to be of practical benefit to their community. This qualitative study found that housing, transport and positive connections through nurturing and engaged parents were some of the most important issues raised. Participants also wanted future research to focus on issues specific to children such as nutrition, hearing loss, language development and capacity to learn. These findings will guide future work led by local Aboriginal researchers to co-design the proposed cohort study.

Global health impact, priority and time.

This paper addresses normative issues that arise in relation to indicators and measures of health impact. With inspiration from Nicole Hassoun's recent proposal, the paper argues and illustrates that those interested in measuring global health impact face questions about how to prioritize among those with ill-health, how to weigh benefits to those who cannot lead minimally good lives against benefits to the better off, and how to think about whether someone is badly off.

Prioritization of Injury Prevention and Management Programs and Research and Development (R&D) Projects: Survey Using the Delphi Technique and Analytic Hierarchy Process.

We prioritized injury prevention and management programs, and research and development (R&D) projects using the Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for national plan. We summarized 21 programs and 31 R&D projects based on opinions collected in the opinion survey and brainstorming. Expert panel evaluated program and project relevance in the two Delphi rounds to make consensus. Total scores were calculated by adding criterion weights calculated through the AHP multiplied by the average of scores for each program and project. The top three programs were "Integrated Management System for Injury Data," "Comprehensive Injury Surveillance System," and "Transport System Improvement Program for Major Trauma." The top three R&D projects were researches on "Identification of Vulnerable Workers Injuries to Strengthen Protections," "Data Integration on Injury and Disability," and "Using Public Health Big Data to Identify Injury Status and Risk Factors." Experts highly rated the programs to improve injury surveillance system.

Physical Activity Promotion in North Carolina: a Reassessment of Public Park and Recreation Directors.

Regular physical activity is widely considered by public health and parks and recreation professionals as a key determinant of individual and community health and well-being. Prior research has shown that building sustainable health partnerships with community organizations can help parks and recreation departments meet many US health challenges. This descriptive study examined the perceptions of North Carolina public parks and recreation directors regarding physical activity and health partnership practices in their communities. The study was also a 15-year follow-up to a study and examined whether park and recreation director perceptions of health partnerships had changed given the many social, economic, and health events that have occurred since the original survey. Directors from two hundred seventy-five North Carolina city and county parks and recreation departments were surveyed in the Spring of 2022 to determine 1) directors' effort allocation in promoting physical activity toward vulnerable populations, 2) challenges associated with promoting community physical activity, and 3) differences in effort allocation, future priorities, and partnership among varying director and departmental demographics. Results were compared to findings from a 2007 study of NC perceptions of health partnerships, upon which the present study was based. One hundred twenty-three completed questionnaires were returned, resulting in a response rate of 45%. Directors in 2022 allocated similarly higher levels of effort toward older adults, families, and people with low income as did directors in 2007, while youth and adults with disabilities and people with chronic health conditions received lower allocations of effort from directors in 2022. Barriers such as lack of staff knowledge on how to promote physical activity, lack of citizen and political support, and lack of knowledge of under-represented groups' physical activity preferences were less pronounced in 2022 compared to 2007. Several distinct differences were revealed between female and male directors' rankings of effort and future priorities, as well as their perceptions of physical activity opportunities for women and people with disabilities. Partnerships with county health departments are being reported more in counties with the highest health disparities compared to more healthy counties, indicating that partnerships are being targeted and implemented in areas where resources are most needed. This study represents a meaningful extension of research conducted prior to the 2008 Great Recession and COVID-19 pandemic and provides recommendations for public parks and recreation departments to consider promoting physical activity and building community resilience in the face of future economic and health challenges.

Underlying motivations hampering Flemish primary care physicians from overcoming the barriers in osteoporosis care: an EMR-facilitated clinical reasoning study.

BACKGROUND: Over half of the European population aged minimum 65 years presents with at least two chronic diseases. Attention towards these diseases exhibits disparities, with limited primary care physician (PCP) attention for osteoporosis. This was confirmed in a previous integrated osteoporosis care (IOC) project in which notable difficulties to enlist PCPs arose. Consequently, this study was initiated in Flemish PCPs for in-depth analysis of underlying mechanisms hampering PCPs to fully commit to osteoporosis care. METHODS: A qualitative Electronic Medical Record (EMR)-facilitated clinical reasoning study was conducted. A semi-structured interview guide was employed to guide PCPs from reflections on their own patients to broader views regarding osteoporosis care. An inductive thematic analysis was performed using NVivo 12. RESULTS: Thirteen PCPs were interviewed. They stated that osteoporosis patients often had complex (medical) profiles. PCPs emphasised the ongoing necessity for prioritisation within this context. This leads to a competition for PCP attention during consultations at three levels: i. between acute versus preventive care; ii. between primary fracture prevention and other preventive services and iii. between secondary fracture prevention and other preventive services; spanning eight areas of competition: disease significance, perceived impact, PCP awareness, the patient agenda, PCP competence, PCP support, perceived patient burden, and efficiency of care provision. Applicability of these areas of competition differed between levels. CONCLUSION: The intricate context in which PCPs operate, creates a competition for PCP attention leading to a lack of attention for fracture prevention. To preserve efforts in fracture prevention, areas of competition should be systematically addressed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Approval for the study has been provided by the Ghent University Hospital Ethics Committee (BC-09797).

A tailored approach to horizon scanning for cancer medicines.

BACKGROUND: Horizon scanning (HS) is the systematic identification of emerging therapies to inform policy and decision-makers. We developed an agile and tailored HS methodology that combined multi-criteria decision analysis weighting and Delphi rounds. As secondary objectives, we aimed to identify new medicines in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer and colorectal cancer most likely to impact the Australian government's pharmaceutical budget by 2025 and to compare clinician and consumer priorities in cancer medicine reimbursement. METHOD: Three cancer-specific clinician panels (total n = 27) and a consumer panel (n = 7) were formed. Six prioritisation criteria were developed with consumer input. Criteria weightings were elicited using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Candidate medicines were identified and filtered from a primary database and validated against secondary and tertiary sources. Clinician panels participated in a three-round Delphi survey to identify and score the top five medicines in each cancer type. RESULTS: The AHP and Delphi process was completed in eight weeks. Prioritisation criteria focused on toxicity, quality of life (QoL), cost savings, strength of evidence, survival, and unmet need. In both curative and non-curative settings, consumers prioritised toxicity and QoL over survival gains, whereas clinicians prioritised survival. HS results project the ongoing prevalence of high-cost medicines. Since completion in October 2021, the HS has identified 70 % of relevant medicines submitted for Pharmaceutical Benefit Advisory Committee assessment and 60% of the medicines that received a positive recommendation. CONCLUSION: Tested in the Australian context, our method appears to be an efficient and flexible approach to HS that can be tailored to address specific disease types by using elicited weights to prioritise according to incremental value from both a consumer and clinical perspective. POLICY SUMMARY: Since HS is of global interest, our example provides a reproducible blueprint for adaptation to other healthcare settings that integrates consumer input and priorities.

COVID-19-related global health governance and population health priorities for health equity in G20 countries: a scoping review.

Since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, the promotion of health equity including the health of various population sub-groups has been compromised, human rights jeopardised, and social inequities further exacerbated. Citizens worldwide, including in the Group of 20 (G20) countries, were affected by both global health governance (GHG) processes and decisions and public health measures taken by governments to respond to COVID-19. While it is critical to swiftly respond to COVID-19, little is known about how and to what extent the GHG is affecting population health priorities for health equity in global economies such as the G20 countries. This scoping review synthesised and identified knowledge gaps on how the COVID-19-related GHG is affecting population health priorities for policy, programme, and research in G20 countries. We followed the five-stage scoping review methodology promoted by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We searched four bibliographic databases for references conducted in G20 countries and regions and published in English and French, between January 2020 and April 2023. Out of 4,625 references and after two phases of screening, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. G20 countries included in the review were Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and the European Union. We found insufficient collaboration and coordination and misalignment among governance actors at multiple levels. In most cases, equity considerations were not prioritised while unequal consequences of COVID-19 public health measures on population groups were widely reported. COVID-19-related population health priorities mainly focused on upstream and midstream determinants of health. Our scoping review showed the stark inequities of COVID-19 public health outcomes, coupled with a prevalent lack of coherent collaboration and coordination among governance actors. Moreover, governance as an object of empirical study is still emerging when examining its intersection with global health and population health policy, programme, and research. An urgent shift is required to effectively act upon structural health determinants that include transformative and comprehensive policies for prevention, equity, resilience, and sustainable health.

Longitudinal wastewater surveillance of four key pathogens during an unprecedented large-scale COVID-19 outbreak in China facilitated a novel strategy for addressing public health priorities-A proof of concept study.

Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) is a promising tool for monitoring the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens, providing a novel public health strategy to combat disease. In this study, we first analysed nationwide reports of infectious diseases and selected Salmonella, norovirus, and influenza A virus (IAV) as prioritized targets apart from SARS-CoV-2 for wastewater surveillance. Next, the decay rates of Salmonella, norovirus, and IAV in wastewater at various temperatures were established to obtain corrected pathogen concentrations in sewage. We then monitored the concentrations of these pathogens in wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) influents in three cities, establishing a prediction model to estimate the number of infected individuals based on the mass balance between total viral load in sewage and individual viral shedding. From October 2022 to March 2023, we conducted multipathogen wastewater surveillance (MPWS) in a WWTP serving one million people in Xi'an City, monitoring the concentration dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, Salmonella, norovirus, and IAV in sewage. The infection peaks of each pathogen were different, with Salmonella cases and sewage concentration declining from October to December 2022 and only occasionally detected thereafter. The SARS-CoV-2 concentration rapidly increased from December 5th, peaked on December 26th, and then quickly decreased until the end of the study. Norovirus and IAV were detected in wastewater from January to March 2023, peaking in February and March, respectively. We used the prediction models to estimate the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Xi'an city, with nearly 90 % of the population infected in urban regions. There was no significant difference between the predicted and actual number of hospital admissions for IAV. We also accurately predicted the number of norovirus cases relative to the reported cases. Our findings highlight the importance of wastewater surveillance in addressing public health priorities, underscoring the need for a novel workflow that links the prediction results of populations with public health interventions and allocation of medical resources at the community level. This approach would prevent medical resource panic squeezes, reduce the severity and mortality of patients, and enhance overall public health outcomes.

Identifying key policy objectives for strong primary care: a cross-sectional study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to identify key policy objectives by investigating the perception of important stakeholders and affected professionals concerning relevance and feasibility of a successful primary care (PC) reform. BACKGROUND: Since 2013, the Austrian PC system has been undergoing a reform process to establish multiprofessional primary care units. The reforms have various defined objectives and lack clear priorities. METHODS: After the definition and consensus-based selection of 12 policy objectives, a cross-sectional online survey on their relevance and feasibility was distributed via email and social media to PC and public health networks. The survey was conducted in the period from January to February 2020. Results were analyzed descriptively, and further, Pearson Chi-Square Test or Fisher's Exact Test was performed for group comparison regarding respondents' characteristics. Open-ended responses were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. FINDINGS: In total, 169 questionnaires were completed. A total of 46.3% of the responders had more than 20 years of professional experience (female: 60.5%). A mandatory internship in general practice, vocational training for general practice, and a modern remuneration system were the three top-rated policy objectives regarding relevance. A mandatory internship in general practice, specialization in general practice, and coding of services and diagnosis were assessed as the most feasible objectives. The group comparisons regarding working field, years of professional experience, age, and sex did not show any meaningful results in the evaluation of relevance and feasibility. DISCUSSION: In the view of the study participants, easily obtainable objectives include adapting the duration and setting of internships for medical students, as well as mandatory vocational training for GP trainees. Further efforts are necessary to achieve complex objectives such as the adoption of a modern remuneration scheme and a comprehensive quality assurance program. Building capacity and creating team-oriented environments are also important aspects of a successful PC reform.

What interventions should we implement in England's mental health services? The mental health implementation network (MHIN) mixed-methods approach to rapid prioritisation.

Introduction: Setting mental health priorities helps researchers, policy makers, and service funders improve mental health services. In the context of a national mental health implementation programme in England, this study aims to identify implementable evidence-based interventions in key priority areas to improve mental health service delivery. Methods: A mixed-methods research design was used for a three step prioritisation approach involving systematic scoping reviews (additional manuscript under development), expert consultations and data triangulation. Groups with diverse expertise, including experts by experience, worked together to improve decision-making quality by promoting more inclusive and comprehensive discussions. A multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) model was used to combine participants' varied opinions, data and judgments about the data's relevance to the issues at hand during a decision conferencing workshop where the priorities were finalised. Results: The study identified mental health interventions in three mental health priority areas: mental health inequalities, child and adolescent mental health, comorbidities with a focus on integration of mental and physical health services and mental health and substance misuse problems. Key interventions in all the priority areas are outlined. The programme is putting some of these evidence-based interventions into action nationwide in each of these three priority mental health priority areas. Conclusion: We report an inclusive attempt to ensure that the list of mental health service priorities agrees with perceived needs on the ground and focuses on evidence-based interventions. Other fields of healthcare may also benefit from this methodological approach if they need to make rapid health-prioritisation decisions.

Priority setting to support a public health research agenda: a modified Delphi study with public health stakeholders in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Research priority setting (RPS) studies are necessary to close the significant gap between the scientific evidence produced and the evidence stakeholders need. Their findings can make resource allocation in research more efficient. However, no general framework for conducting an RPS study among public health stakeholders exists. RPS studies in public health are rare and no such study has been previously conducted and published in Germany. Therefore, we aimed to investigate which research topics in public health are prioritised by relevant stakeholders in Germany. METHODS: Our RPS study consisted of a scoping stage and a Delphi stage each split into two rounds. Firstly, we invited members of the German Public Health Association to gather expert insights during two initial workshops. Next, we defined the relevant stakeholder groups and recruited respondents. Thereafter, we collected research topics and assessment criteria with the respondents in the first Delphi round and aggregated the responses through content analysis. Finally, we asked the respondents to rate the research topics with the assessment criteria in the second Delphi round. RESULTS: In total, 94 out of the 140 invited public health organisations nominated 230 respondents for the Delphi study of whom almost 90% participated in both Delphi rounds. We compiled a comprehensive list of 76 research topics that were rated and ranked by several assessment criteria. We split the research topics into two types, substantive research topics and methodological-theoretical research topics respectively, to ensure the comparability among the research topics. In both types of research topics-substantive research topics and methodological-theoretical research topics-the respective top five ranked research topics hardly differed between public health researchers and public health practitioners. However, clear differences exist in the priority ranking of many (non-top priority) research topics between the stakeholder groups. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates that it is possible, with limited resources, to prioritise research topics for public health at the national level involving a wide range of pertinent stakeholders. The results can be used by research funding institutions to initiate calls for research projects with an increased relevance for health and/or scientific progress.