Research priority setting related to older adults: a scoping review to inform the Cochrane-Campbell Global Ageing Partnership work programme

Abstract

Objective: To explore and map the findings of prior research priority-setting initiatives related to improving the health and well-being of older adults.

Design: Scoping review.

Data sources: Searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, AgeLine, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases from January 2014 to 26 April 2021, and the James Lind Alliance top 10 priorities.

Eligibility criteria: We included primary studies reporting research priorities gathered from stakeholders that focused on ageing or the health of older adults (≥60 years). There were no restrictions by setting, but language was limited to English and French.

Data extraction and synthesis: We used a modified Reporting Guideline for Priority Setting of Health Research (REPRISE) guideline to assess the transparency of the reported methods. Population-intervention-control-outcome (PICO) priorities were categorised according to their associated International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI) and International Classification of Functioning (ICF) outcomes. Broad research topics were categorised thematically.

Results: Sixty-four studies met our inclusion criteria. The studies gathered opinions from various stakeholder groups, including clinicians (n=56 studies) and older adults (n=35), and caregivers (n=24), with 75% of the initiatives involving multiple groups. None of the included priority-setting initiatives reported gathering opinions from stakeholders located in low-income or middle-income countries. Of the priorities extracted, 272 were identified as broad research topics, while 217 were identified as PICO priorities. PICO priorities that involved clinical outcomes (n=165 priorities) and interventions concerning health-related behaviours (n=59) were identified most often. Broad research topics on health services and systems were identified most often (n=60). Across all these included studies, the reporting of six REPRISE elements was deemed to be critically low.

Conclusion: Future priority setting initiatives should focus on documenting a more detailed methodology with all initiatives eliciting opinions from caregivers and older adults to ensure priorities reflect the opinions of all key stakeholder groups.

Keywords: Dementia; EPIDEMIOLOGY; GERIATRIC MEDICINE; PUBLIC HEALTH.

Figure 1

Flow diagram of the study selection following the PRISMA template. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Figure 2

Matrix of PICO priorities as classified by their associated ICHI interventions and who healthy ageing framework ICF outcomes. The size of the circles corresponds to the number of priorities (n=217). ICF, International Classification of Functioning; ICHI, International Classification of Health Interventions; PICO, population–intervention–control–outcome.