Priority-setting in health research in Iran: a qualitative study on barriers and facilitators

被引:7
作者
Badakhshan, Abbas [1 ,2 ]
Arab, Mohammad [3 ]
Rashidian, Arash [3 ]
Mehrdad, Neda [4 ,5 ]
Zendehdel, Kazem [6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Management & Econ, Int Campus, Tehran, Iran
[2] Golestan Univ Med Sci, Hlth Management & Social Dev Res Ctr, Gorgan, Iran
[3] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Management & Econ, Tehran, Iran
[4] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Endocrinol & Metab Res Ctr, Endocrinol & Metab Clin Sci Inst, Tehran, Iran
[5] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Knowledge Utilizat Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[6] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Canc Inst Iran, Canc Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
[7] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Canc Inst Iran, Canc Biol Res Ctr, Tehran, Iran
关键词
Health research; Iran; management; priority-setting; EXPERIENCE; COUNTRIES; LESSONS; SUCCESS; BURDEN; INCOME;
D O I
10.1186/s12961-018-0313-1
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Priority-setting is a complicated and time-consuming process; however, if appropriately conducted, it could efficiently divert resources to the most important studies. A considerable body of evidence indicates that priority-setting measures in health research taken so far in Iran have not satisfied decision-makers, policy-makers, funders, communities, or even researchers. This study was designed to explore the flaws of these measures and their deciding factors. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 23 key participants and used a thematic data-analysis approach to analyse verbatim transcripts and documents. Our interviewees, who were skilful at conducting health research and worked as managers at different levels of the health system, were selected using a purposeful sampling. We asked about their experiences of priority-setting in health and relevant challenges and asked for recommendations. These semi-structured interviews were taped, transcribed and analysed in terms of content and themes using the MAXQDA10 qualitative data-analysis software. Results: With regard to priority-setting facilitators and barriers, four themes were extracted, namely managerial factors, structural factors, motivational factors, and process factors. Managers' commitment, consideration of intellectual property, compliance with superordinate rules, and provision of a definition of reliable criteria were among the facilitators. The rapid turnover of managers, inefficiency of criteria for faculty promotion, and disregard of appeal mechanisms were examples of the barriers. Conclusion: It is important to consider appropriate regulations and motivations to provide research priorities and divert scarce resources to them. In addition, it is necessary to improve the knowledge and skills of researchers and research administration offices on priority-setting methods, thereby enhancing priority-oriented research projects.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 61 条
[1]  
Abachizadeh K, 2011, ASIAN PAC J CANCER P, V12, P2365
[2]  
Ali N, 2006, WHAT FACTORS INFLUEN
[3]  
[Anonymous], J YASUJ U MED SCI
[4]  
Asadollahi HR, 2006, J MANAGE, V99-100, P13
[5]  
Ashigbie P., 2013, PRIORITY MED EUROPE
[6]  
Becerra-Posada F, 2004, LANCET, V364, P997, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17026-8
[7]  
Butler P., 2000, BANGK INT C HLTH RES
[8]   Descriptive survey of non-commercial randomised controlled trials in the United Kingdom, 1980-2002 [J].
Chalmers, I ;
Rounding, C ;
Lock, K .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2003, 327 (7422) :1017-1019
[9]   How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set [J].
Chalmers, Iain ;
Bracken, Michael B. ;
Djulbegovic, Ben ;
Garattini, Silvio ;
Grant, Jonathan ;
Guelmezoglu, A. Metin ;
Howells, David W. ;
Ioannidis, John P. A. ;
Oliver, Sandy .
LANCET, 2014, 383 (9912) :156-165
[10]  
Chimere-Dan G, 2001, ESSENTIAL NATL HLTH