Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project
<strong>Background and Aims</strong> The Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group (TAG) conducts systematic reviews of the evidence for tobacco cessation and prevention interventions. In 2016 TAG conducted a priority setting, stakeholder engagement project to identify where further research is n...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Published: |
John Wiley & Sons Ltd
2017
|
| _version_ | 1826283035125874688 |
|---|---|
| author | Lindson, N Richards-Doran, D Heath, L Hartmann-Boyce, J |
| author_facet | Lindson, N Richards-Doran, D Heath, L Hartmann-Boyce, J |
| author_sort | Lindson, N |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <strong>Background and Aims</strong> The Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group (TAG) conducts systematic reviews of the evidence for tobacco cessation and prevention interventions. In 2016 TAG conducted a priority setting, stakeholder engagement project to identify where further research is needed in the areas of tobacco control and smoking cessation. <strong>Design</strong> The project comprised of two surveys and a workshop. A range of stakeholders participated, including members of the public (smokers and ex-smokers), clinicians, researchers, research funders, healthcare commissioners and public health organisations. The first survey phase identified unanswered research questions in the field of tobacco control. The second phase asked participants to rank these, with overall rankings calculated by combining scores across participants. The workshop allowed attendees to discuss prioritisation of topics and questions in more depth. Workshop discussions were transcribed and analysed thematically, and a final voting activity at the close of the workshop allowed participants to choose topics to prioritise and to de-prioritise. <strong>Findings</strong> 304 stakeholders (researchers, health professionals, smokers and ex-smokers, guideline developers, research funders and policy makers, representing 28 countries) identified 183 unanswered research questions. These were categorised into 15 research categories. 175 participants prioritised categories and questions in the second survey phase, with ‘electronic cigarettes’; ‘addressing inequalities’; and ‘mental health and other substance abuse’ prioritised as the top three categories. 43 stakeholders attended the workshop and discussed reasons for and against category prioritisation. Prioritised research categories largely mirrored those in the survey stage, though ‘treatment delivery’ also emerged as a key category. Five cross-cutting themes emerged: efficacy; relative efficacy; cost effectiveness; addressing inequalities; and different types of evidence. <strong>Conclusions</strong> There are many unanswered questions in the field of tobacco control. Stakeholders provide a rich source of information on how these should be prioritised, and using this resource we can maximise the likelihood that findings of research are useful and implemented. We hope researchers and funders will be able to use the priorities identified to inform future practice, as Cochrane TAG will use them to inform its work. Future prioritisation work would benefit from explicitly targeting non-US and non-UK stakeholders and from examining where priorities may differ based on stakeholder group. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T00:52:51Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:86fb6833-afa0-428a-8e54-8c49efdfb244 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T00:52:51Z |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publisher | John Wiley & Sons Ltd |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:86fb6833-afa0-428a-8e54-8c49efdfb2442022-03-26T22:07:44ZSetting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement projectJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:86fb6833-afa0-428a-8e54-8c49efdfb244Symplectic Elements at OxfordJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd2017Lindson, NRichards-Doran, DHeath, LHartmann-Boyce, J<strong>Background and Aims</strong> The Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group (TAG) conducts systematic reviews of the evidence for tobacco cessation and prevention interventions. In 2016 TAG conducted a priority setting, stakeholder engagement project to identify where further research is needed in the areas of tobacco control and smoking cessation. <strong>Design</strong> The project comprised of two surveys and a workshop. A range of stakeholders participated, including members of the public (smokers and ex-smokers), clinicians, researchers, research funders, healthcare commissioners and public health organisations. The first survey phase identified unanswered research questions in the field of tobacco control. The second phase asked participants to rank these, with overall rankings calculated by combining scores across participants. The workshop allowed attendees to discuss prioritisation of topics and questions in more depth. Workshop discussions were transcribed and analysed thematically, and a final voting activity at the close of the workshop allowed participants to choose topics to prioritise and to de-prioritise. <strong>Findings</strong> 304 stakeholders (researchers, health professionals, smokers and ex-smokers, guideline developers, research funders and policy makers, representing 28 countries) identified 183 unanswered research questions. These were categorised into 15 research categories. 175 participants prioritised categories and questions in the second survey phase, with ‘electronic cigarettes’; ‘addressing inequalities’; and ‘mental health and other substance abuse’ prioritised as the top three categories. 43 stakeholders attended the workshop and discussed reasons for and against category prioritisation. Prioritised research categories largely mirrored those in the survey stage, though ‘treatment delivery’ also emerged as a key category. Five cross-cutting themes emerged: efficacy; relative efficacy; cost effectiveness; addressing inequalities; and different types of evidence. <strong>Conclusions</strong> There are many unanswered questions in the field of tobacco control. Stakeholders provide a rich source of information on how these should be prioritised, and using this resource we can maximise the likelihood that findings of research are useful and implemented. We hope researchers and funders will be able to use the priorities identified to inform future practice, as Cochrane TAG will use them to inform its work. Future prioritisation work would benefit from explicitly targeting non-US and non-UK stakeholders and from examining where priorities may differ based on stakeholder group. |
| spellingShingle | Lindson, N Richards-Doran, D Heath, L Hartmann-Boyce, J Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project |
| title | Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project |
| title_full | Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project |
| title_fullStr | Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project |
| title_full_unstemmed | Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project |
| title_short | Setting research priorities in tobacco control: a stakeholder engagement project |
| title_sort | setting research priorities in tobacco control a stakeholder engagement project |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lindsonn settingresearchprioritiesintobaccocontrolastakeholderengagementproject AT richardsdorand settingresearchprioritiesintobaccocontrolastakeholderengagementproject AT heathl settingresearchprioritiesintobaccocontrolastakeholderengagementproject AT hartmannboycej settingresearchprioritiesintobaccocontrolastakeholderengagementproject |