PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10837035

Priority setting for health research: lessons from developing countries. The Working Group on Priority Setting.

Abstract

Research resources for addressing health problems of developing countries remain disproportionately low compared with the tremendous disease burdens borne by these countries. There is a need to focus these scarce resources on research that will optimize health benefits and lead to equity. This paper reviews processes and methods that have been used for setting research priorities. Past and current processes have focused on expert-driven research agenda, emphasizing scientific autonomy and global analyses. Methods for setting priorities have focused on the metrics of disease burdens, while less attention has been placed on who sets priorities and how choices are made. The paper proposes a strategy of priority setting, based on lessons learned from essential national health research (ENHR) approaches attempted in several developing countries. With equity in health and development as its goal, the proposed model is demand-driven, and involves multi-dimensional inputs and multiple stakeholders. Various steps of the process are discussed: getting participants involved; gathering evidence and information; determining criteria for priority setting; and implementation and evaluation. The paper concludes with a discussion of the gap between national research priorities and the research agenda set at regional and global levels, an issue that needs to be satisfactorily addressed in the future.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

2000. Priority setting for health research: lessons from developing countries. The Working Group on Priority Setting.. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol%2F15.2.130

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Costs of surgeries in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Surgical care is essential for achieving global health equity, yet low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face major gaps in access and planning, partly due to limited evidence on the costs and resource requirements of surgical interventions. Understanding these costs is vital for designing efficient and equitable health systems. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review (covering MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, EconLit and grey literature) to identify studies reporting the costs of surgeries in LMICs from January 2000 to June 2023. Minor and major surgical procedures were considered, focusing on therapeutic procedures (excluding diagnostic interventions). Studies that clearly identified, quantified and costed hospital resources and services deployed in the provision of surgical care, and included at least two of the surgical production factors (ie, consumables, diagnostics, personnel, infrastructure and overhead) in the costing were included. Costs were standardised to 2023 International dollars (I$) for comparability. RESULTS: A total of 74 studies from 29 countries met the inclusion criteria, with 210 cost estimates across 65 procedure groups. Costs varied widely: from I$1.54 for a caesarean section in Tanzania to I$618 098 for paediatric cataract surgery in Zambia. Full costing studies reported higher estimates than partial costing studies. Most studies (60%) originated from upper-middle-income countries, with limited data (10%) from low-income settings. CONCLUSION: This review provides a reference list of surgical procedure costs across LMICs, highlighting considerable cost variation by procedure, specialty and country. The findings underscore the need for better-quality, standardised cost data-especially from low-income countries-to inform national surgical plans, universal health coverage benefit packages and reimbursement policies.

Developing Countries↗