OBJECTIVE: Understand and analyze procedures used to create national integrated research agendas from 2007 to 2011 in Argentina, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, and Paraguay. METHODS: Descriptive, cross-sectional study using an online survey of agenda preparation processes; specifically, development, integration, implementation, and use and dissemination of the agenda. RESULTS: The 45 respondents reported following specific methodologies for agenda construction and had a good opinion of organizational aspects with regard to prior information provided and balance among disciplines and stakeholders. Some 60% considered the coordinators impartial, although 25% mentioned biases favoring some subject; 42% received technical support from consultants, reading matter, and methodological guidelines; 40% engaged in subject-matter priority-setting; and 55% confirmed dissemination and communication of the agenda. However, only 22% reported inclusion of agenda topics in national calls for research proposals. CONCLUSIONS: In the countries studied, development of the health research agenda was characterized by prior planning and appropriate organization to achieve - consensus-based outcomes. Nevertheless, the agendas were not used in national calls for research proposals, reflecting lack of coordination in national health research systems and lack of connection between funders and researchers. It is recommended that stakeholders strengthen integration and advocacy efforts to modify processes and structures of agenda-based calls for research proposals.
OBJECTIVE: Understand and analyze procedures used to create national integrated research agendas from 2007 to 2011 in Argentina, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, and Paraguay. METHODS: Descriptive, cross-sectional study using an online survey of agenda preparation processes; specifically, development, integration, implementation, and use and dissemination of the agenda. RESULTS: The 45 respondents reported following specific methodologies for agenda construction and had a good opinion of organizational aspects with regard to prior information provided and balance among disciplines and stakeholders. Some 60% considered the coordinators impartial, although 25% mentioned biases favoring some subject; 42% received technical support from consultants, reading matter, and methodological guidelines; 40% engaged in subject-matter priority-setting; and 55% confirmed dissemination and communication of the agenda. However, only 22% reported inclusion of agenda topics in national calls for research proposals. CONCLUSIONS: In the countries studied, development of the health research agenda was characterized by prior planning and appropriate organization to achieve - consensus-based outcomes. Nevertheless, the agendas were not used in national calls for research proposals, reflecting lack of coordination in national health research systems and lack of connection between funders and researchers. It is recommended that stakeholders strengthen integration and advocacy efforts to modify processes and structures of agenda-based calls for research proposals.
Authors: Juan Camilo Fuentes; Lorena Andrea Cañón; Ángela Viviana Pérez; Carlos E Pinzón; Angélica María Pérez; Paola Astrid Avellaneda; Álvaro Enrique Morales; Y Jorge Enrique Fernández Journal: Rev Panam Salud Publica Date: 2017-11-30