Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Dec;11(4):418-31.
doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00492.x.

Do different stakeholder groups share mental health research priorities? A four-arm Delphi study

Affiliations

Do different stakeholder groups share mental health research priorities? A four-arm Delphi study

Christabel Owens et al. Health Expect. 2008 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Despite considerable investment in research priority setting within diverse fields of healthcare, little is known about the extent to which different stakeholder groups share research priorities. Conflicting priorities may jeopardize stakeholder engagement in research.

Objective: To identify the research priorities of different stakeholder groups within mental health care and examine the extent and nature of agreement between them.

Design: Using a Delphi technique, we conducted parallel consultation processes within four different stakeholder groups. Each group process consisted of three rounds.

Setting and participants: The study was carried out within a mental health and learning disabilities trust in southern England. Participants were recruited from the following groups: mental health service users (34), informal carers (26), mental health practitioners (35) and service managers (23).

Findings: There were striking differences between the four groups in respect of their ability and willingness to make priority decisions. These differences notwithstanding, there was considerable overlap in respect of their research interests. All groups identified and attached high importance to issues relating to the promotion of independence, self-esteem and recovery. The quality of in-patient care, the place of psychological therapies and the relationship between physical and mental health also emerged across the board.

Conclusions: The confluence of four different stakeholder groups around a number of clear themes is highly encouraging, providing a framework within which to construct a research agenda and suggesting that mental health research can be built on solid partnerships.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. INVOLVE . Strategic Plan 2003–2006: Creating the Expert Resource. Available at: http://www.invo.org.uk, accessed on 14 April 2008.
    1. INVOLVE . Operational Plan 2007/2008. Available at: http://www.invo.org.uk, accessed on 14 April 2008.
    1. Oliver S, Clarke‐Jones L, Rees R et al. Involving consumers in research and development agenda setting for the NHS: developing an evidence‐based approach. Health Technology Assessment, 2004; 8: p.2. - PubMed
    1. Caron‐Flinterman JF, Broerse JE, Teerling J, Bunders JF. Patients’ priorities concerning health research: the case of asthma and COPD research in the Netherlands. Health Expectations, 2005; 8: 253–263. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shea B, Santesso N, Qualman A et al. Consumer‐driven health care: building partnerships in research. Health Expectations, 2005; 8: 352–359. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms