Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of country experiences

From: A review of selected research priority setting processes at national level in low and middle income countries: towards fair and legitimate priority setting

COUNTRY

METHOD USED

DOCUMENTATION AND LEGITIMACY

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT

REVISION OR APPEALS PROCESS

LEADERSHIP

Malaysia

Two approaches: Combined Approach Matrix (CAM) and identification of information gaps

This process involved prioritization by facilitators or experts of potential research topics. Priority Lists were reviewed and validated by a broader group of stakeholders and widely publicized

Selected groups of stakeholders involved a wide range of experts and health care managers from the public sector, private sector, professional organisations and academia.

No appeals process.

Ministry of Health

Cameroon

ENHR (Essential National Health Research) approach with support from COHRED.

ENHR approach with support of COHRED,-Ministry of Science and Technology, -List of research priorities, - endorsing and managing the agenda

Very limited stakeholder involvement- only Ministry of Science and Technology,

No appeals process. Stated as an objective but no plan

Single government department led

Peru

COHRED used as a reference

Researcher hired to develop research priorities. Two reports presented and discussed at a workshop.

Limited stakeholder representation

No appeals process.

Researcher led

South Africa (1)

ENHR approach

Following the ENHR priority setting process, single government department focuses on 12 sectors. Process used the Delphi method.

Some stakeholder representation

No appeals process

Single government department

South Africa (2)

Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI)

Small group of technical experts

Medium sized group of stakeholders comprising professionals, members of the public.

No appeals process.

Researcher

Brazil

COHRED

The procedure comprised five well documented steps.

Priority research topics were submitted for public consultation. Extensive stakeholder involvement and public consultation. Transparent process with wide consultation

No appeals process.

Ministry of Health

Philippines

COHRED

Bottom-up approach with consultation at three levels: regional, zonal and national.

Poor stakeholder involvement. Not all participants considered the process relevant.

No appeals process.

Department of health and the Philippine Council for Health Research and Development

Pakistan

Combined Approach Matrix

The first step was the organization of a national seminar to develop priorities for health research. Participants included members from Health, Population Welfare, and Science and Technology Ministries, health academic institutions, university departments, the private sector and the NGO community.

No stakeholder involvement

No appeals process.

Ministry of Health

Argentina

Combined Matrix Approach

CAM used to guide financing strategies for the health research priorities identified.

No stakeholder involvement

No appeals process.

Researcher led with support from National Commission for Health Research and Ministry of Health