Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies. For full reference to the included evidence syntheses, see Additional file 4

From: Lack of systematicity in research prioritisation processes — a scoping review of evidence syntheses

Author and publication year

Review type

Material

Search (sources, limitations)

Overall aim

No. of included studies

Badakhshan (2018) [20]

Systematic review

Reports on priority setting in health research in the Islamic Republic of Iran

Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception to December 2015

Evaluating the quality of priority-setting reports on health research in the Islamic Republic of Iran

36

Booth (2018) [21]

Scoping review

Studies using any consensus consultation method

ASSIA, CINAHL, MEDLINE/MEDLINE In-Process, and Embase

Searches limited to 2000 to 2017

Mapping research priorities identified in existing research prioritisation exercises regarding infants, children, and young people with life-limiting conditions

24

Bryant (2014) [10]

Narrative review

Peer-reviewed studies

MEDLINE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and grey literature

Searches limited to 1990 to March 2012

Examining methods, models, and frameworks used to make health research priorities

15

Erntoft (2011) [22]

Systematic review

Empirical articles

PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, and PsycINFO

Searches limited to 1990 to 2009

Investigating which factors and criteria are used in priority setting of pharmaceuticals

30

Garcia (2015) [23]

Systematic review

Studies in English, Spanish, or Portuguese that address the topic in the region of the Americas

Web of Science, PubMed, LILACS, and Google

Searches limited to 2008 to 2013

Systematic review of literature on priorities in nursing research on health systems and services in the region of the Americas as a step towards developing a nursing research agenda

23

Manafo (2018) [24]

Rapid review

Studies conducted in Canada, the US, Europe, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Scandinavian countries

HealthStar (via OVID), CINAHL, ProQuest databases, Scholar’s Portal

Searches limited to 2001 to 2017

Describing the evidence in relation to patient and public engagement priority setting in both health ecosystems and health research

62

McGregor (2014) [9]

Systematic review

Peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature

PubMed, Embase, and CINHAL

No date limits on searches; the search ended in March 2014

Priority setting processes have been undertaken in a number of low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings and using a variety of methods. We undertook a critical review of reports of these processes

116

Pii (2019) [25]

Systematic review

Original research studies describing the involvement of cancer patients, stakeholders, and carers as active partners at any stage of the research process were included

PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO

Searches limited to 2006 to 2017

Describing the current state of patient and public involvement in cancer research with a focus on applied methods, among others

27

Reveiz (2013) [26]

Systematic review

National health research policies and priority agendas

The Health Research Web (HRWeb), web-based search of the official websites of health-related institutions, PubMed, LILACS, and Google

Searches limited to 2002 to 2012

Comparing health research priority-setting methods and characteristics among countries in Latin America and the Caribbean between 2002 and 2012

16

Rylance (2010) [27]

Systematic review

Peer-reviewed studies related to tuberculosis

PubMed, reference lists of included studies, experts

Searches limited to 1998 to 2010

Summarising existing priority statements and assessing the rigour of methods used to generate priorities for tuberculosis research

30

Tong (2017) [28]

Systematic review

Studies that directly elicited and identified research priorities for adult solid organ transplantation and published in any language in peer-reviewed journals

MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO from database inception, James Lind Alliance website, and Google Scholar

No date limits on the searches; search ended 31 October 2016

Evaluating research priority setting in solid organ transplantation

21

Tong (2015) [29]

Systematic review

Studies that elicited patient, caregiver, healthcare provider, or policymaker priorities for research on kidney disease

MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, Google Scholar, JLA, and PubMed

No date limits on searches; searches from inception to 1 May 2014

Evaluating methods to research prioritisation in kidney disease

16