Table 3 The themes proposed by the participants differ in the level of decision making and the ranking in each level

Priority-setting approaches

1

1

2

Rapid turnover of managers

19

25

16

Stewardship-Inappropriate leadership of research

2

2

1

Centralized decision making

20

33

31

Stakeholders: end users

3

8

3

Stewardship: No standardization

21

7

23

Inefficiency of faculties’ promotion criteria

4

6

12

Stakeholders: Policy makers

22

28

20

Lack of National Innovation System

5

3

4

Considering priority setting as a one-time activity

23

29

21

Limiting research budgets to priorities

6

5

9

Using an automated system

24

30

30

Lack of a efficacious evaluation system

7

13

35

Narrow time limit for priority setting

25

11

15

Scarcity of knowledge about health research priority-setting

8

15

18

Publicizing health research priority-setting results

26

20

19

Lack of evidences about research gaps

9

4

7

Stewardship-Lack of Transparency in other sectors

27

23

33

Stakeholders: ways of engagement

10

10

25

Stakeholders: NGOs

28

14

16

Individual willingness

11

9

17

Ignoring appealing mechanisms

29

26

22

Alignment with high level rule

12

12

24

Stewardship:Absence of a research map (research puzzles)

30

34

14

Generalization

13

22

8

Stakeholders: Funders

31

19

29

Commitment of managers

14

24

6

Meritocracy in management

32

32

13

Defining reliable PS criteria

15

18

5

Role of media

33

27

27

Defining scope of PS

16

21

25

Considering intellectual property

34

35

34

Scientific autonomy

17

15

11

Integration of heath with medical education

35

31

32

No relation with industries

18

17

27