Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method: VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method

Igor Rudan, Sachiyo Yoshida, Kit Yee Chan, Devi Sridhar, Kerri Wazny, Harish Nair, Aziz Sheikh, Mark Tomlinson, Joy E. Lawn, Zulfiqar A. Bhutta, Rajiv Bahl, Mickey Chopra, Harry Campbell, Shams El Arifeen, Robert E Black, Simon Cousens

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the "Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative") as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences. Methods We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so-called grey literature. Results Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low-and middle-income countries, and national-level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI-based articles adhered to the five recommended priority-setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two-thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, "low cost", "sustainability", "acceptability", "feasibility", "relevance" and others). Conclusions The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority-setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on "crowd-sourcing". It is inclusive, fostering "ownership" of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number011004
JournalJournal of Global Health
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Health Priorities
Research
Crowdsourcing
Literature
Foster Home Care
Ownership
Zoonoses
Health Policy
Health Education
PubMed
Dementia
Mental Health
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method : VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method. / Rudan, Igor; Yoshida, Sachiyo; Chan, Kit Yee; Sridhar, Devi; Wazny, Kerri; Nair, Harish; Sheikh, Aziz; Tomlinson, Mark; Lawn, Joy E.; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A.; Bahl, Rajiv; Chopra, Mickey; Campbell, Harry; El Arifeen, Shams; Black, Robert E; Cousens, Simon.

In: Journal of Global Health, Vol. 7, No. 1, 011004, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rudan, I, Yoshida, S, Chan, KY, Sridhar, D, Wazny, K, Nair, H, Sheikh, A, Tomlinson, M, Lawn, JE, Bhutta, ZA, Bahl, R, Chopra, M, Campbell, H, El Arifeen, S, Black, RE & Cousens, S 2017, 'Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method: VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method', Journal of Global Health, vol. 7, no. 1, 011004. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.011004
Rudan, Igor ; Yoshida, Sachiyo ; Chan, Kit Yee ; Sridhar, Devi ; Wazny, Kerri ; Nair, Harish ; Sheikh, Aziz ; Tomlinson, Mark ; Lawn, Joy E. ; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A. ; Bahl, Rajiv ; Chopra, Mickey ; Campbell, Harry ; El Arifeen, Shams ; Black, Robert E ; Cousens, Simon. / Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method : VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method. In: Journal of Global Health. 2017 ; Vol. 7, No. 1.
@article{f3ecfad4ef2b4fe18c3abc10331c9f14,
title = "Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method: VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method",
abstract = "Background Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the {"}Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative{"}) as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences. Methods We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so-called grey literature. Results Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low-and middle-income countries, and national-level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI-based articles adhered to the five recommended priority-setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two-thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, {"}low cost{"}, {"}sustainability{"}, {"}acceptability{"}, {"}feasibility{"}, {"}relevance{"} and others). Conclusions The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority-setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on {"}crowd-sourcing{"}. It is inclusive, fostering {"}ownership{"} of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries.",
author = "Igor Rudan and Sachiyo Yoshida and Chan, {Kit Yee} and Devi Sridhar and Kerri Wazny and Harish Nair and Aziz Sheikh and Mark Tomlinson and Lawn, {Joy E.} and Bhutta, {Zulfiqar A.} and Rajiv Bahl and Mickey Chopra and Harry Campbell and {El Arifeen}, Shams and Black, {Robert E} and Simon Cousens",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.7189/jogh.07.011004",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
journal = "Journal of Global Health",
issn = "2047-2978",
publisher = "Edinburgh University Global Health Society",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Setting health research priorities using the CHNRI method

T2 - VII. A review of the first 50 applications of the CHNRI method

AU - Rudan, Igor

AU - Yoshida, Sachiyo

AU - Chan, Kit Yee

AU - Sridhar, Devi

AU - Wazny, Kerri

AU - Nair, Harish

AU - Sheikh, Aziz

AU - Tomlinson, Mark

AU - Lawn, Joy E.

AU - Bhutta, Zulfiqar A.

AU - Bahl, Rajiv

AU - Chopra, Mickey

AU - Campbell, Harry

AU - El Arifeen, Shams

AU - Black, Robert E

AU - Cousens, Simon

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Background Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the "Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative") as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences. Methods We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so-called grey literature. Results Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low-and middle-income countries, and national-level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI-based articles adhered to the five recommended priority-setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two-thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, "low cost", "sustainability", "acceptability", "feasibility", "relevance" and others). Conclusions The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority-setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on "crowd-sourcing". It is inclusive, fostering "ownership" of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries.

AB - Background Several recent reviews of the methods used to set research priorities have identified the CHNRI method (acronym derived from the "Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative") as an approach that clearly became popular and widely used over the past decade. In this paper we review the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method, published between 2007 and 2016, and summarize the most important messages that emerged from those experiences. Methods We conducted a literature review to identify the first 50 examples of application of the CHNRI method in chronological order. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed and so-called grey literature. Results Initially, between 2007 and 2011, the CHNRI method was mainly used for setting research priorities to address global child health issues, although the first cases of application outside this field (eg, mental health, disabilities and zoonoses) were also recorded. Since 2012 the CHNRI method was used more widely, expanding into the topics such as adolescent health, dementia, national health policy and education. The majority of the exercises were focused on issues that were only relevant to low-and middle-income countries, and national-level applications are on the rise. The first CHNRI-based articles adhered to the five recommended priority-setting criteria, but by 2016 more than two-thirds of all conducted exercises departed from recommendations, modifying the CHNRI method to suit each particular exercise. This was done not only by changing the number of criteria used, but also by introducing some entirely new criteria (eg, "low cost", "sustainability", "acceptability", "feasibility", "relevance" and others). Conclusions The popularity of the CHNRI method in setting health research priorities can be attributed to several key conceptual advances that have addressed common concerns. The method is systematic in nature, offering an acceptable framework for handling many research questions. It is also transparent and replicable, because it clearly defines the context and priority-setting criteria. It is democratic, as it relies on "crowd-sourcing". It is inclusive, fostering "ownership" of the results by ensuring that various groups invest in the process. It is very flexible and adjustable to many different contexts and needs. Finally, it is simple and relatively inexpensive to conduct, which we believe is one of the main reasons for its uptake by many groups globally, particularly those in low- and middle-income countries.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032368594&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032368594&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7189/jogh.07.011004

DO - 10.7189/jogh.07.011004

M3 - Article

C2 - 28685049

AN - SCOPUS:85032368594

VL - 7

JO - Journal of Global Health

JF - Journal of Global Health

SN - 2047-2978

IS - 1

M1 - 011004

ER -