Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: The Ministry of Health (MoH), Malaysia is committed to providing health services for all citizens and is interested in strengthening the country’s health research capacity. Health research priority setting should be as evidence-based as possible, while also incorporating the views of a wide range of stakeholders. The use of systematic reviews to identify research gap in setting health research priorities ensures that research funded has the greatest potential public health benefit.
Objectives: To identify the range of health research activities in Malaysia for health research priority- setting.
Methods:
The Research Policy and Planning Division under National Institutes of Health (NIH), MoH created a series of workshop since September 2019, with representation from the MoH, public universities, and external facilitators who were public health specialist and academician. Information was gathered through rapid evidence synthesis to provides a body of knowledge to assist in the development of health research priority-setting for Malaysia. The MoH priority setting process was adapted from the Combined Approach Matrix and the Essential National Health Research methods. Areas were identified through evidence mapping of systematic reviews and impact evaluations. The stakeholders focused on the quality of existing evidence for policy-makers and identified the research gaps. All the gaps were highlighted and synthesized.
Results:
These workshops utilized a combination of two different priority setting models. The ENHR and CAM models were modified by the workshop facilitators, refined further by the workshop planning team, and adapted based on feedback during the workshop. Because of this combination, the workshop could be moulded to participants’ needs and methods could be flexible in how they were used.
Conclusions: Organizing this systematic health research priority-setting process lays the groundwork for future health research priority-setting workshops to be conducted in using this combination of internationally recognized best practices. Therefore, it has been important to evaluate the process of health research setting in order to utilize the best method in the future. This exercise was conducted in a limited resource setting but was found to be feasible and recommendable. The input of constituencies that were not included in this workshop is important for improving the equity of a priority setting processes in the future.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: Adoption of policies by involving the public to identify values of equity and accountability in the health care systems. Identifying research gap through with limited resources
Objectives: To identify the range of health research activities in Malaysia for health research priority- setting.
Methods:
The Research Policy and Planning Division under National Institutes of Health (NIH), MoH created a series of workshop since September 2019, with representation from the MoH, public universities, and external facilitators who were public health specialist and academician. Information was gathered through rapid evidence synthesis to provides a body of knowledge to assist in the development of health research priority-setting for Malaysia. The MoH priority setting process was adapted from the Combined Approach Matrix and the Essential National Health Research methods. Areas were identified through evidence mapping of systematic reviews and impact evaluations. The stakeholders focused on the quality of existing evidence for policy-makers and identified the research gaps. All the gaps were highlighted and synthesized.
Results:
These workshops utilized a combination of two different priority setting models. The ENHR and CAM models were modified by the workshop facilitators, refined further by the workshop planning team, and adapted based on feedback during the workshop. Because of this combination, the workshop could be moulded to participants’ needs and methods could be flexible in how they were used.
Conclusions: Organizing this systematic health research priority-setting process lays the groundwork for future health research priority-setting workshops to be conducted in using this combination of internationally recognized best practices. Therefore, it has been important to evaluate the process of health research setting in order to utilize the best method in the future. This exercise was conducted in a limited resource setting but was found to be feasible and recommendable. The input of constituencies that were not included in this workshop is important for improving the equity of a priority setting processes in the future.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: Adoption of policies by involving the public to identify values of equity and accountability in the health care systems. Identifying research gap through with limited resources