Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Systematic Review of Priority Setting Studies in Health Research in the Islamic Republic of Iran; [Analyse Systematique Des Etudes Concernant L’Etablissement Des Priorites En Matiere De Recherche En Sante En Republique Islamique D’Iran] Publisher Pubmed



Badakhshan A1 ; Arab M1 ; Rashidian A1, 2 ; Gholipour M3 ; Mohebbi E4 ; Zendehdel K4, 5
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Department of Health Management and Economics, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2. Department of Information, Evidence and Research, Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, World Health Organization, Cairo, Egypt
  3. 3. Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
  4. 4. Cancer Research Center, Cancer Institute of Iran, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  5. 5. Cancer Biology Research Center, Cancer Institute of Iran, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Source: Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal Published:2018


Abstract

Background: ‎Several research priority-setting studies have been conducted in different countries, including ‎the Islamic Republic of Iran. Aims: We conducted a systematic review and evaluated the quality of the priority-setting ‎reports about health research in the Islamic Republic of Iran. ‎ Methods: English and Farsi databases were searched from January to July 2016 to extract reports (up to December 2015) about priority setting in ‎health research in the Islamic Republic of Iran. We constructed a checklist to extract data from the identified studies. Articles were studied in detail ‎and content analysis was carried out. Relevant items were scored and analysed ‎using Microsoft Excel.‎ Results: We identified 36 articles. Eight articles involved all the main stakeholders. About half the ‎articles used valid criteria for ranking. Transparency was fulfilled in 13 articles. Upstream rules and ‎regulations were ignored in 26 articles. An implementation plan was ‎considered in 9 articles and context analysis was demonstrated in only 3. ‎ Conclusions: Developing standard packages for priority setting, training of researchers and ‎improving the capacity of organizations may improve the quality of priority-setting studies in the future.‎. © World Health Organization (WHO) 2018.