TY - JOUR
T1 - Global research priorities related to the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide : results of a global consultation
AU - Abalos, E.
AU - Adanu, R.
AU - Bernitz, S.
AU - Binfa, L.
AU - Dao, B.
AU - Downe, Soo
AU - Hofmeyr, J.G.
AU - Homer, C.S.E.
AU - Hundley, V.
AU - GaladanciGogoi, H.A.
AU - Lavender, T.
AU - Lissauer, D.
AU - Lumbiganon, P.
AU - Pattinson, R.
AU - Qureshi, Z.
AU - Stringer, J.S.A.
AU - Pujar, Y.V.
AU - Vogel, J.P.
AU - Yunis, K.
AU - Nkurunziza, T.
AU - de Mucio, B.
AU - Gholbzouri, K.
AU - Jayathilaka, A.
AU - Aderoba, A.K.
AU - Pingray, V.
AU - Althabe, F.
AU - Betran, A.P.
AU - Bonet, M.
AU - Bucagu, M.
AU - Oladapo, O.
AU - Souza, J.P.
AU - World Health Organization Labour Care Guide Research Prioritization Group, null
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) published the WHO Labour Care Guide (LCG) in 2020 to support the implementation of its 2018 recommendations on intrapartum care. The WHO LCG promotes evidence-based labour monitoring and stimulates shared decision-making between maternity care providers and labouring women. There is a need to identify critical questions that will contribute to defining the research agenda relating to implementation of the WHO LCG. Methods: This mixed-methods prioritization exercise, adapted from the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) and James Lind Alliance (JLA) methods, combined a metrics-based design with a qualitative, consensus-building consultation in three phases. The exercise followed the reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE). First, 30 stakeholders were invited to submit online ideas or questions (generation of research ideas). Then, 220 stakeholders were invited to score "research avenues" (i.e., broad research ideas that could be answered through a set of research questions) against six independent and equally weighted criteria (scoring of research avenues). Finally, a technical working group (TWG) of 20 purposively selected stakeholders reviewed the scoring, and refined and ranked the research avenues (consensus-building meeting). Results: Initially, 24 stakeholders submitted 89 research ideas or questions. A list of 10 consolidated research avenues was scored by 75/220 stakeholders. During the virtual consensus-building meeting, research avenues were refined, and the top three priorities agreed upon were: (1) optimize implementation strategies of WHO LCG, (2) improve understanding of the effect of WHO LCG on maternal and perinatal outcomes, and the process and experience of labour and childbirth care, and (3) assess the effect of the WHO LCG in special situations or settings. Research avenues related to the organization of care and resource utilization ranked lowest during both the scoring and consensus-building process. Conclusion: This systematic and transparent process should encourage researchers, program implementers, and funders to support research aligned with the identified priorities related to WHO LCG. An international collaborative platform is recommended to implement prioritized research by using harmonized research tools, establishing a repository of research priorities studies, and scaling-up successful research results.
AB - Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) published the WHO Labour Care Guide (LCG) in 2020 to support the implementation of its 2018 recommendations on intrapartum care. The WHO LCG promotes evidence-based labour monitoring and stimulates shared decision-making between maternity care providers and labouring women. There is a need to identify critical questions that will contribute to defining the research agenda relating to implementation of the WHO LCG. Methods: This mixed-methods prioritization exercise, adapted from the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) and James Lind Alliance (JLA) methods, combined a metrics-based design with a qualitative, consensus-building consultation in three phases. The exercise followed the reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE). First, 30 stakeholders were invited to submit online ideas or questions (generation of research ideas). Then, 220 stakeholders were invited to score "research avenues" (i.e., broad research ideas that could be answered through a set of research questions) against six independent and equally weighted criteria (scoring of research avenues). Finally, a technical working group (TWG) of 20 purposively selected stakeholders reviewed the scoring, and refined and ranked the research avenues (consensus-building meeting). Results: Initially, 24 stakeholders submitted 89 research ideas or questions. A list of 10 consolidated research avenues was scored by 75/220 stakeholders. During the virtual consensus-building meeting, research avenues were refined, and the top three priorities agreed upon were: (1) optimize implementation strategies of WHO LCG, (2) improve understanding of the effect of WHO LCG on maternal and perinatal outcomes, and the process and experience of labour and childbirth care, and (3) assess the effect of the WHO LCG in special situations or settings. Research avenues related to the organization of care and resource utilization ranked lowest during both the scoring and consensus-building process. Conclusion: This systematic and transparent process should encourage researchers, program implementers, and funders to support research aligned with the identified priorities related to WHO LCG. An international collaborative platform is recommended to implement prioritized research by using harmonized research tools, establishing a repository of research priorities studies, and scaling-up successful research results.
UR - https://hdl.handle.net/1959.7/uws:74048
U2 - 10.1186/s12978-023-01600-4
DO - 10.1186/s12978-023-01600-4
M3 - Article
SN - 1742-4755
VL - 20
JO - Reproductive Health
JF - Reproductive Health
IS - 1
M1 - 57
ER -