Research priority setting in plastic and reconstructive surgery: A systematic review.

Area of Science:

• Plastic and reconstructive surgery research
• Health research priority setting
• Evidence-based medicine

Background:

• Historically, researcher priorities have driven health research agendas, potentially misaligning with patient and clinician needs.
• Plastic surgery research often lacks high-quality evidence, necessitating robust priority-setting initiatives.
• Transparent and representative priority setting is crucial for directing research activity and funding effectively.

Approach:

• A systematic review appraised priority setting initiatives in plastic surgery using the REporting guideline For health research IN priority SEtting (REPRISE).
• Searches were conducted across OVID Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the James Lind Alliance (JLA) repository.
• Dual-author screening and data extraction followed PRISMA guidelines.

Key Points:

• Seventeen priority setting initiatives were included, predominantly in high-income, national settings.
• Burns and hand surgery were the most frequent subspecialties addressed.
• The James Lind Alliance (JLA) and qualitative approaches were most common, with limited inclusion of patient or multidisciplinary stakeholders.
• Few initiatives reported implementation or impact measurement strategies.

Conclusions:

• Plastic surgery priority setting underrepresents stakeholders from lower-income countries, despite global disease burdens.
• Future research priority setting should increase patient and multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement for consensus.
• Clear implementation strategies are essential to maximize the impact of prioritized research.