Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2025
Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Emphasis should be placed on identifying and reporting research priorities to increase research value: An empirical
Yicheng Gao1,2,3, Zhihan Liu1,2,3, Rui Cao1,2,3
1Centre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Objectives:
To compared the presentation of research priorities in the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) developed under the guidance of the GRADE working group or its two co-chair, and the Chinese CPGs.
Methods:
This was a methodological empirical analysis. We searched PubMed, Embase, and four Chinese databases (Wanfang, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database) and retrieved nine Chinese guideline databases or Society websites as well as GRADE Pro websites. We included all eligible GRADE CPGs and a random sample of double number of Chinese CPGs, published 2018 to 2022. The reviewers independently screened and extracted the data, and we summarized and analyzed the reporting on the research priorities in the CPGs.
Results:
Of the 135 eligible CPGs (45 GRADE CPGs and 90 Chinese CPGs), 668, 138 research priorities were identified respectively. More than 70% of the research priorities in GRADE CPGs and Chinese CPGs had population and intervention (PI) structure. 99 (14.8%) of GRADE CPG research priorities had PIC structures, compared with only 4(2.9%) in Chinese. And 28.4% (190) GRADE CPG research priorities reflected comparisons between PICO elements, approximately double those in Chinese. The types of research priorities among GRADE CPGs and Chinese CPGs were mostly focused on the efficacy of interventions, and the type of comparative effectiveness in the GRADE research priorities was double those in Chinese.
Conclusions:
There was still considerable room for improvement in the developing and reporting of research priorities in Chinese CPGs. Key PICO elements were inadequately presented, with more attention on intervention efficacy and insufficient consideration given to values, preferences, health equity, and feasibility. Identifying and reporting of research priorities deserves greater effort in the future.
More Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Related Concept Videos
01:40Archival Research
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:22Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
01:50Statistical Significance
01:29Nursing Assessment
The nurse collects all aspects of the patient's health in the initial assessment, establishing priorities for ongoing focused assessments...