Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Priority setting for mental health research in Chile.
Zitko, Pedro; Borghero, Francesca; Zavala, Cynthia; Markkula, Niina; Santelices, Emilio; Libuy, Nicolás; Pemjean, Alfredo.
Afiliação
  • Zitko P; Mental Health Department, Ministry of Health of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
  • Borghero F; Unidad de Estudios Asistenciales, Complejo Asistencial Barros Luco, Gran Avenida José Miguel Carrera 3204, San Miguel, 8900085 Santiago, Chile.
  • Zavala C; Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Diego Portales, Santiago, Chile.
  • Markkula N; Mental Health Department, Ministry of Health of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
  • Santelices E; Mental Health Department, Ministry of Health of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
  • Libuy N; Department of Public Health, Pontificia Catholic University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
  • Pemjean A; Mental Health Department, Ministry of Health of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Int J Ment Health Syst ; 11: 61, 2017.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29026439
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Scientific knowledge is a fundamental tool for making informed health policy decisions, but the link between health research and public policy decision-making is often missing. This study aims to identify and prioritize a national set of research gaps in mental health.

METHODS:

A multi-approach method to identify gaps in knowledge was developed, including (1) document analysis and identification of possible research questions, (2) interviews to Ministry of Health key informants, (3) focus groups with different stakeholders, and (4) a web consultation addressed to academics. The identified gaps were translated to a standardized format of research questions. Criteria for prioritization were extracted from interviews and focus groups. Then, a team of various professionals applied them for scoring each question research.

FINDINGS:

Fifty-four people participated in the knowledge gaps identification process through an online consultation (n = 23) and focus groups (n = 18). Prioritization criteria identified were extent of the knowledge gap, size of the objective population, potential benefit, vulnerability, urgency and applicability. 155 research questions were prioritized, of which 44% were related to evaluation of systems and/or health programs, and 26% to evaluation of interventions, including questions related to cost-effectiveness. 30% of the research questions came from the online consultation, and 36% from key informants. Users groups contributed with 10% of total research questions.

CONCLUSION:

A final priority setting for mental health research was reached, making available for authorities and research agencies a list of 155 research questions ordered by relevance. The experience documented here could serve to other countries interested in developing a similar process.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research País como assunto: America do sul / Chile Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research País como assunto: America do sul / Chile Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article