Jones R, Lamont T, Haines A
Department of General Practice, United Medical School of Guy's Hospital, London.
BMJ. 1995 Oct 21;311(7012):1076-80. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7012.1076.
Since 1991 the NHS has attempted to identify and prioritise its needs for research and development in a systematic manner. This has not been done before and there is little evidence on which to draw. Multidisciplinary expert groups have identified priorities in different topics using explicit criteria and after widespread consultation within the NHS and research community to identify pressing problems and opportunities for research. This paper focuses on a review completed in 1993 to identify research and development priorities for the NHS in relation to the interface between primary and secondary care. The review covered several recent developments which require evaluation. The authors describe the process used to identify research and development priorities in this complex subject and examine the strengths and weaknesses of the approach. This case study should help to stimulate a wider debate on methods of identifying priorities, particularly those using participatory approaches, in research and non-research contexts.
自1991年以来,英国国民医疗服务体系(NHS)一直试图以系统的方式确定其研发需求并排出优先顺序。此前从未这样做过,也几乎没有可供借鉴的证据。多学科专家组运用明确的标准,在NHS和研究界进行广泛磋商以确定紧迫问题和研究机会之后,确定了不同主题的优先事项。本文重点关注1993年完成的一项综述,该综述旨在确定NHS在初级保健与二级保健衔接方面的研发优先事项。该综述涵盖了几项需要评估的近期进展。作者描述了在这个复杂主题中确定研发优先事项所采用的过程,并审视了该方法的优缺点。本案例研究应有助于激发关于确定优先事项方法的更广泛辩论,尤其是在研究和非研究背景下使用参与式方法的情况。