Centre for Global Health Research, Usher Institute of Informatics and Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Centre of Population Health Sciences, Usher Institute of Informatics and Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
J Glob Health. 2019 Jun;9(1):010701. doi: 10.7189/jogh.09.010701.
The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for health research prioritisation relies on stakeholders weighting criteria used to assess research options. These weights in turn impact on the final scores and ranks assigned to research options. Three quarters of CHNRI studies published to date have not involved stakeholders in criteria weighting. Of those that have, few incorporated members of the public into stakeholder groups. Those that have compared different stakeholder groups, such as donors, researchers, or policy makers, showed that different groups place different values upon CHNRI criteria. When choosing the composition of a stakeholder group, it may be important to understand factors that may influence weighting. Drawing upon a group of international public stakeholders, this study explores some of the effects of individual and demographic characteristics has on the weights assigned to the most commonly used CHNRI criteria, with the aim of informing future researchers on avoiding future biases.
Individual and demographic information and 5-point Likert scale responses to questions about the importance of 15 CHNRI criteria were collected from 1031 "Turkers" (Amazon Mechanical Turk workers) via Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT), which is an online crowdsourcing platform. Thirteen of the fifteen criteria were analysed using random-intercept models and the remaining two were analysed through logistic regression.
Self-reported health status explained most of the variability in participants' responses across criteria (11/15 criteria), followed by being female (10/15), ethnicity (9/15), employment (8/15), and religion (7/15). Differences across criteria indicate that when choosing stakeholder groups, researchers need to consider these factors to minimise bias.
Researchers should collect and report more detailed information from stakeholders, including individual and demographic characteristics, and ensure participation from both genders, multiple ethnicities, religious beliefs, and people with differing health statuses to be transparent regarding possible biases in health research prioritisation. Our analyses indicate that these factors do influence the relative importance of these values, even when the data appears fairly homogeneous.
儿童健康与营养研究倡议(CHNRI)的健康研究优先排序方法依赖于利益相关者对用于评估研究方案的标准进行加权。这些权重反过来又会影响研究方案的最终得分和排名。迄今为止,CHNRI 已发表的四分之三的研究都没有让利益相关者参与标准加权。在参与的研究中,很少有研究将公众成员纳入利益相关者群体。在比较不同利益相关者群体(如捐赠者、研究人员或政策制定者)的研究中,研究结果表明,不同群体对 CHNRI 标准的重视程度不同。在选择利益相关者群体的组成时,了解可能影响权重的因素可能很重要。本研究利用一组国际公众利益相关者,探讨了个体和人口统计学特征对最常用的 CHNRI 标准的权重分配的影响,旨在为未来的研究人员提供信息,避免未来的偏见。
通过亚马逊机械土耳其(AMT)从 1031 名“土耳其人”(亚马逊机械土耳其工人)那里收集了个人和人口统计学信息以及对 15 项 CHNRI 标准重要性的 5 分李克特量表回答,这是一个在线众包平台。使用随机截距模型分析了 15 项标准中的 13 项,另外两项则通过逻辑回归进行分析。
自我报告的健康状况解释了参与者对标准的反应(15 项标准中的 11 项)的大部分可变性,其次是女性(15 项标准中的 10 项)、种族(15 项标准中的 9 项)、就业(15 项标准中的 8 项)和宗教(15 项标准中的 7 项)。标准之间的差异表明,在选择利益相关者群体时,研究人员需要考虑这些因素,以尽量减少偏见。
研究人员应从利益相关者那里收集和报告更详细的信息,包括个人和人口统计学特征,并确保两性、多种族裔、宗教信仰和不同健康状况的人参与,以确保在健康研究优先排序方面的透明度,避免可能存在的偏见。我们的分析表明,即使数据看起来相当同质,这些因素也会影响这些价值观的相对重要性。