Table 2 Standardised tool used to collect information about the processes
From: How can we improve priority-setting for investments in health research? A case study of tuberculosis
Tool component | Standard definition used to determine which stakeholders and criteria were relevant |
|---|---|
Which stakeholders were involved as experts? [tick all that apply] | • Academics o From a single discipline such as one of: basic science, epidemiology, operational/translational research, health economics, health policy and systems research, etc. o From multiple disciplines: two or more disciplines • International policy-makers/technical experts: representatives of WHO and other policy or technical assistance bodies working across multiple countries • National disease control programme representatives • Civil society: advocacy groups, community groups, etc. • Funding body representatives: Funding Gaps Analysis, TB Program Strategy, Wellcome Trust, etc. • Patients • Physicians: whose primary occupation is treating (TB) patients in high-burden settings • Industry representatives or product development partnerships |
What criteria/values were used to prioritise areas? [tick all that apply] | • Effectiveness/efficacy: impact on reducing disease burden or adverse consequences of disease • Knowledge gap: addressing critical scientific knowledge gaps that limit progress on disease control • Cost-effectiveness: cost of delivery relative to impact is appropriate for high disease-burden settings • Deliverability: investment will produce an output that can be implemented and deliver impact in settings with high disease burden (feasibility) • Equity: knowledge or tool produced will benefit all populations, including vulnerable groups and populations in low-resource settings • Sustainability: output implementation can be supported by finances and infrastructure available in high disease burden settings for the long term • Other (specified) |