Identifying research needs for improving health care

Stephanie M. Chang, Timothy S. Carey, Elisabeth Uphoff Kato, Jeanne-Marie Guise, Gillian D. Sanders

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Insights from systematic reviews can help new studies better meet the priorities and needs of patients and communities. However, systematic reviews unfortunately have not yet achieved this position to direct and guide new research studies. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Evidence-based Practice Center Program uses systematic reviews to identify gaps in current evidence and has developed a systematic process of prioritizing these gaps with stakeholder input into clearly defined "future research needs." Eight Evidence-based Practice Centers began to apply this effort in 2010 to various clinical and policy topics. Gaps that prevented systematic reviewers from answering central questions of the review may include insufficient studies on subpopulations, insufficient studies with appropriate comparators, lack of appropriate outcomes measured, and methods problems. Stakeholder panels, consisting of advocacy groups, patients, researchers, clinicians, funders, and policymakers, help refine the gaps through multiple conference calls and prioritization exercises. Each report highlights a focused set of 4 to 15 high-priority needs with an accompanying description of possible considerations for study design. Identification of high-priority research needs could potentially speed the development and implementation of high-priority, stakeholder-engaged research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)439-445
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume157
Issue number6
StatePublished - Sep 18 2012

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Practice
Delivery of Health Care
Research
Patient Advocacy
Health Services Research
Research Personnel
Exercise

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Chang, S. M., Carey, T. S., Kato, E. U., Guise, J-M., & Sanders, G. D. (2012). Identifying research needs for improving health care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 157(6), 439-445.

Identifying research needs for improving health care. / Chang, Stephanie M.; Carey, Timothy S.; Kato, Elisabeth Uphoff; Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Sanders, Gillian D.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 157, No. 6, 18.09.2012, p. 439-445.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chang, SM, Carey, TS, Kato, EU, Guise, J-M & Sanders, GD 2012, 'Identifying research needs for improving health care', Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 157, no. 6, pp. 439-445.
Chang SM, Carey TS, Kato EU, Guise J-M, Sanders GD. Identifying research needs for improving health care. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2012 Sep 18;157(6):439-445.
Chang, Stephanie M. ; Carey, Timothy S. ; Kato, Elisabeth Uphoff ; Guise, Jeanne-Marie ; Sanders, Gillian D. / Identifying research needs for improving health care. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2012 ; Vol. 157, No. 6. pp. 439-445.
@article{58d78d556bca433e843186160130e64e,
title = "Identifying research needs for improving health care",
abstract = "Insights from systematic reviews can help new studies better meet the priorities and needs of patients and communities. However, systematic reviews unfortunately have not yet achieved this position to direct and guide new research studies. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Evidence-based Practice Center Program uses systematic reviews to identify gaps in current evidence and has developed a systematic process of prioritizing these gaps with stakeholder input into clearly defined {"}future research needs.{"} Eight Evidence-based Practice Centers began to apply this effort in 2010 to various clinical and policy topics. Gaps that prevented systematic reviewers from answering central questions of the review may include insufficient studies on subpopulations, insufficient studies with appropriate comparators, lack of appropriate outcomes measured, and methods problems. Stakeholder panels, consisting of advocacy groups, patients, researchers, clinicians, funders, and policymakers, help refine the gaps through multiple conference calls and prioritization exercises. Each report highlights a focused set of 4 to 15 high-priority needs with an accompanying description of possible considerations for study design. Identification of high-priority research needs could potentially speed the development and implementation of high-priority, stakeholder-engaged research.",
author = "Chang, {Stephanie M.} and Carey, {Timothy S.} and Kato, {Elisabeth Uphoff} and Jeanne-Marie Guise and Sanders, {Gillian D.}",
year = "2012",
month = "9",
day = "18",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "157",
pages = "439--445",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying research needs for improving health care

AU - Chang, Stephanie M.

AU - Carey, Timothy S.

AU - Kato, Elisabeth Uphoff

AU - Guise, Jeanne-Marie

AU - Sanders, Gillian D.

PY - 2012/9/18

Y1 - 2012/9/18

N2 - Insights from systematic reviews can help new studies better meet the priorities and needs of patients and communities. However, systematic reviews unfortunately have not yet achieved this position to direct and guide new research studies. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Evidence-based Practice Center Program uses systematic reviews to identify gaps in current evidence and has developed a systematic process of prioritizing these gaps with stakeholder input into clearly defined "future research needs." Eight Evidence-based Practice Centers began to apply this effort in 2010 to various clinical and policy topics. Gaps that prevented systematic reviewers from answering central questions of the review may include insufficient studies on subpopulations, insufficient studies with appropriate comparators, lack of appropriate outcomes measured, and methods problems. Stakeholder panels, consisting of advocacy groups, patients, researchers, clinicians, funders, and policymakers, help refine the gaps through multiple conference calls and prioritization exercises. Each report highlights a focused set of 4 to 15 high-priority needs with an accompanying description of possible considerations for study design. Identification of high-priority research needs could potentially speed the development and implementation of high-priority, stakeholder-engaged research.

AB - Insights from systematic reviews can help new studies better meet the priorities and needs of patients and communities. However, systematic reviews unfortunately have not yet achieved this position to direct and guide new research studies. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Evidence-based Practice Center Program uses systematic reviews to identify gaps in current evidence and has developed a systematic process of prioritizing these gaps with stakeholder input into clearly defined "future research needs." Eight Evidence-based Practice Centers began to apply this effort in 2010 to various clinical and policy topics. Gaps that prevented systematic reviewers from answering central questions of the review may include insufficient studies on subpopulations, insufficient studies with appropriate comparators, lack of appropriate outcomes measured, and methods problems. Stakeholder panels, consisting of advocacy groups, patients, researchers, clinicians, funders, and policymakers, help refine the gaps through multiple conference calls and prioritization exercises. Each report highlights a focused set of 4 to 15 high-priority needs with an accompanying description of possible considerations for study design. Identification of high-priority research needs could potentially speed the development and implementation of high-priority, stakeholder-engaged research.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84868306129&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84868306129&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 157

SP - 439

EP - 445

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 6

ER -