Search

Study Question: What are the current national medically assisted reproduction (MAR) data collection systems across EU Member States, and how can these countries contribute to a unique, cycle-by-cycle registry for the European Monitoring of Medically Assisted Reproduction (EuMAR) project?, Summary Answer: The study identified significant variation in MAR data collection practices across Member States, with differences in data types, collection methods, and reporting requirements; the EuMAR project emerges as an opportunity to enhance data standardization and improve MAR data collection in the EU., What Is Known Already: There is a need for new approaches in MAR data collection that include long-term and cross border follow-up. The EuMAR project intends to establish a unified, cycle-by-cycle registry of data on MAR treatments in EU countries, from which accurate cumulative outcomes can be calculated., Study Design, Size, Duration: This cross-sectional study involved a survey and interviews with stakeholders from 26 EU Member States conducted in 2023 over a period of seven months., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Representatives from national competent authorities and professional associations involved in MAR data collection in EU countries were invited to complete the survey and interviewed to assess current data flows, information requirements, and their interest in the EuMAR project., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Half of the participating countries reported having a national MAR registry with cycle-by-cycle data (n = 13), while 31% reported having a national registry with aggregated data (n = 8) and 19% reported having no national registry (n = 5). Of the countries with a national cycle-by-cycle registry, eight countries collect identifiable data, five countries collect pseudonymized data, and one country collects fully anonymized data. Informed consent is required in 10 countries. The main advantages that participants expected from a European registry like EuMAR were the possibility of obtaining national statistics in the absence of a national registry and improving the calculation of cumulative outcomes., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: The results of the study are based on self-reported data, which may be subject to bias, however, the validity of the collected information was verified with different means, including follow-up calls for clarifications and sharing final transcript reports. The feasibility of the proposed data flow models will be tested in a pilot study., Wider Implications of the Findings: Despite the heterogeneity of data collection practices across EU countries, the results show that stakeholders have high expectations of the benefits that the EuMAR registry can bring, namely the improvement of data consistency, cross-border comparability, and cumulative live birth rates, leading to better information for patients, health care providers and policy makers., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The EuMAR project was co-founded by ESHRE and the European Commission (101079865-EuMAR-EU4H-2021-PJ2). No competing interests were declared., Trial Registration Number: N/A., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)

Background: Engaging diverse stakeholders in developing core outcome sets (COSs) can produce more meaningful metrics as well as research responsive to patient needs. The most common COS prioritisation method, Delphi surveys, has limitations related to selection bias and participant understanding, while qualitative methods like group discussions are less frequently used. This study aims to test a co-creation approach to COS development for type 1 diabetes (T1DM) in Peru., Methods: Using a co-creation approach, we aimed to prioritise outcomes for T1DM management in Peru, incorporating perspectives from people with T1DM, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and decision-makers. A set of outcomes were previously identified through a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. Through qualitative descriptive methods, including in-person workshops, each group of stakeholders contributed to the ranking of outcomes. Decision-makers also discussed the feasibility of measuring these outcomes within the Peruvian healthcare system., Results: While priorities varied among participant groups, all underscored the significance of monitoring healthcare system functionality over mortality. Participants recognized the interconnected nature of healthcare system performance, clinical outcomes, self-management, and quality of life. When combining the rankings from all the groups, metrics related to economic impact on the individual and structural support, policies promoting health, and protecting those living with T1DM were deemed more important in comparison to measuring clinical outcomes., Conclusion: We present the first COS for T1DM focused on low-and-middle-income countries and show aspects of care that are relevant in this setting. Diverse prioritisation among participant groups underscores the need of inclusive decision-making processes. By incorporating varied perspectives, healthcare systems can better address patient needs and enhance overall care quality., (© 2024 The Author(s). The International Journal of Health Planning and Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: This manuscript presents a comprehensive framework for the assessment of the value of real-world evidence (RWE) in healthcare decision-making. While RWE has been proposed to overcome some limitations of traditional, one-off studies, no systematic framework exists to measure if RWE actually lowers the burden. This framework aims to fill that gap by providing conceptual approaches for evaluating the time and cost efficiencies of RWE, thus guiding strategic investments in RWE infrastructure., Methods: The framework consists of four components: (114th Congress. 21st Century Cures Act.; 2015. https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ255/PLAW-114publ255.pdf .) identification of stakeholders using and producing RWE, (National Health Council. Glossary of Patient Engagement Terms. Published 2019. Accessed May 18. 2021. https://nationalhealthcouncil.org/glossary-of-patient-engagement-terms/ .) understanding value propositions on how RWE can benefit stakeholders, (Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. CDER Patient-Focused Drug Development. U.S. Food & Drug Administration.) defining key performance indicators (KPIs), and (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - Food and Drug Administration: Center for Devices and Radiological Health and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Use of Real-World Evidence to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Medical Devices - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. 2017. http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guida .) establishing metrics and case studies to assess value. KPIs are categorized as 'better, faster, or cheaper" as an indicator of value: better focusing on high-quality actionable evidence; 'faster,' denoting time-saving in evidence generation, and 'cheaper,' emphasizing cost-efficiency decision compared to methodologies that do not involve data routinely collected in clinical practice. Metrics and relevant case studies are tailored based on stakeholder value propositions and selected KPIs that can be used to assess what value has been created by using RWE compared to traditional evidence-generation approaches and comparing different RWE sources., Results: Operationalized through metrics and case studies drawn from the literature, the value of RWE is documented as improving treatment effect heterogeneity evaluation, expanding medical product labels, and expediting post-market compliance. RWE is also shown to reduce the cost and time required to produce evidence compared to traditional one-off approaches. An original example of a metric that measures the time saved by RWE methods to detect a signal of a product failure was presented based on analysis of the National Cardiovascular Disease Registry., Conclusions: The framework presented in this manuscript offers a comprehensive approach for evaluating the value of RWE, applicable to all stakeholders engaged in leveraging RWE for healthcare decision-making. Through the proposed metrics and illustrated case studies, valuable insights are provided into the heightened efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and improved decision-making within clinical and regulatory domains facilitated by RWE. While this framework is primarily focused on medical devices, it could potentially inform the determination of RWE value in other medical products. By discerning the variations in cost, time, and data utility among various evidence-generation methods, stakeholders are empowered to invest strategically in RWE infrastructure and shape future research endeavors., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Drug Information Association, Inc.)

Background: Pervasive technologies are used to investigate various phenomena outside the laboratory setting, providing valuable insights into real-world human behavior and interaction with the environment. However, conducting longitudinal field trials in natural settings remains challenging due to factors such as low recruitment success and high dropout rates due to participation burden or data quality issues with wireless sensing in changing environments., Objective: This study gathers insights and lessons from 3 real-world longitudinal field studies assessing human behavior and derives factors that impacted their research success. We aim to categorize challenges, observe how they were managed, and offer recommendations for designing and conducting studies involving human participants and pervasive technology in natural settings., Methods: We developed a qualitative coding framework to categorize and address the unique challenges encountered in real-life studies related to influential factor identification, stakeholder management, data harvesting and management, and analysis and interpretation. We applied inductive reasoning to identify issues and related mitigation actions in 3 separate field studies carried out between 2018 and 2022. These 3 field studies relied on gathering annotated sensor data. The topics involved stress and environmental assessment in an office and a school, collecting self-reports and wrist device and environmental sensor data from 27 participants for 3.5 to 7 months; work activity recognition at a construction site, collecting observations and wearable sensor data from 15 participants for 3 months; and stress recognition in location-independent knowledge work, collecting self-reports and computer use data from 57 participants for 2 to 5 months. Our key extension for the coding framework used a stakeholder identification method to identify the type and role of the involved stakeholder groups, evaluating the nature and degree of their involvement and influence on the field trial success., Results: Our analysis identifies 17 key lessons related to planning, implementing, and managing a longitudinal, sensor-based field study on human behavior. The findings highlight the importance of recognizing different stakeholder groups, including those not directly involved but whose areas of responsibility are impacted by the study and therefore have the power to influence it. In general, customizing communication strategies to engage stakeholders on their terms and addressing their concerns and expectations is essential, while planning for dropouts, offering incentives for participants, conducting field tests to identify problems, and using tools for quality assurance are relevant for successful outcomes., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that field trial implementation should include additional effort to clarify the expectations of stakeholders and to communicate with them throughout the process. Our framework provides a structured approach that can be adopted by other researchers in the field, facilitating robust and comparable studies across different contexts. Constantly managing the possible challenges will lead to better success in longitudinal field trials and developing future technology-based solutions., (©Johanna Kallio, Atte Kinnula, Satu-Marja Mäkelä, Sari Järvinen, Pauli Räsänen, Simo Hosio, Miguel Bordallo López. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 31.10.2024.)

Background: Involving stroke patients in clinical research through patient engagement aims to ensure that studies are patient-centered, and may help ensure they are feasible, ethical, and credible, ultimately leading to enhanced trust and communication between researchers and the patient community. In this study, we have conducted a scoping review to identify existing evidence and gaps in SPSE., Methods: The five-step approach outlined by Arksey and O'Malley, in conjunction with the Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, provided the structure for this review. To find relevant articles, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases up to February 2024. Additionally, the review team conducted a hand search using Google Scholar, key journals, and references of highly relevant articles. Reviewers screened articles, selecting eligible English-language ones with available full texts, and extracted data from them into a pre-designed table tested by the research team., Result: Of the 1002 articles initially identified, 21 proved eligible. Stakeholder engagement primarily occurred during the design phase of studies and within the studies using qualitative methodologies. Although the engagement of stakeholders in the research process is increasing, practice regarding terminology and principles of implementation remains variable. Researchers have recognized the benefits of stakeholder engagement, but have also faced numerous challenges that often arise during the research process., Conclusion: The current study identifies stakeholder groups and the benefits and challenges researchers face in implementing their engagement. Given existing challenges and limited specific models or frameworks, it is suggested to explore applied recommendations for stakeholder engagement in future studies, that may enhance stakeholder engagement, overcome obstacles, and unify researchers' understanding of engagement and implementation., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The role of evaluation evidence in guiding health systems strengthening (HSS) investments at the global-level remains contested. A lack of rigorous impact evaluations is viewed by some as an obstacle to scaling resources. However, others suggest that power dynamics and knowledge hierarchies continue to shape perceptions of rigor and acceptability in HSS evaluations. This debate has had major implications on HSS resource allocation in global-level funding decisions. Yet, few studies have examined the relationship between HSS evaluation evidence and prioritization of HSS. In this paper, we explore the perspectives of key global health stakeholders, specifically around the nature of evidence sought regarding HSS and its potential impact on prioritization, the challenges in securing such evidence, and the drivers of intra- and inter-organizational divergences. We conducted a stakeholder analysis, drawing on 25 interviews with senior representatives of major global health organizations, and utilized inductive approaches to data analysis to develop themes., Results: Our analysis suggests an intractable challenge at the heart of the relationship between HSS evaluations and prioritization. A lack of evidence was used as a reason for limited investments by some respondents, citing their belief that HSS was an unproven and potentially risky investment which is driven by the philosophy of HSS advocates rather than evidence. The same respondents also noted that the 'holy grail' of evaluation evidence that they sought would be rigorous studies that assess the impact of investments on health outcomes and financial accountability, and believed that methodological innovations to deliver this have not occurred. Conversely, others held HSS as a cross-cutting principle across global health investment decisions, and felt that the type of evidence sought by some funders is unachievable and not necessary - an 'elusive quest' - given methodological challenges in establishing causality and attribution. In their view, evidence would not change perspectives in favor of HSS investments, and evidence gaps were used as a 'convenient excuse'. Respondents raised additional concerns regarding the design, dissemination and translation of HSS evaluation evidence., Conclusions: Ongoing debates about the need for stronger evidence on HSS are often conducted at cross-purposes. Acknowledging and navigating these differing perspectives on HSS evaluation may help break the gridlock and find a more productive way forward., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid, exposure to which has led to hundreds of thousands of overdose deaths. Novel vaccines are being developed that might protect against fentanyl overdose. Proactive attention to strategic communications and stakeholder engagement may smooth uptake of a novel vaccine given known challenges around vaccine hesitancy and concern for stigma related to substance use., Methods: Qualitative interviews (N = 74) with a purposive sample of adolescents/young adults with opioid use disorder (OUD), family members of persons with OUD, experts in substance use treatment and harm reduction, and community members were conducted and thematically analyzed to discern attitudes toward a fentanyl vaccine, and directions for communications and engagement., Results: Major themes reflected personal concerns for biomedical risk and system-level concerns for alignment and integration of an overdose preventing vaccine with prevailing beliefs about addiction and associated frameworks and philosophies for treatment and response., Conclusion: Acceptability and implementation of a novel fentanyl vaccine targeting overdose will need precision communications that address biomedical, moral/spiritual, and structural perspectives about the nature of addiction. Education about the purpose and limits of a fentanyl vaccine, partnerships with diverse stakeholders from throughout the opioid response ecosystem and interweaving of a vaccine strategy into comprehensive prevention and treatment are recommended., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [Ofer Levy reports financial support was provided by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Elissa Weitzman reports a relationship with OVAX LLC that includes: advisory support. Ofer Levy reports a relationship with OVAX LLC that includes: equity or stocks. David Dowling reports a relationship with OVAX LLC that includes: equity or stocks. Sharon Levy reports a relationship with OVAX LLC that includes: advisory support. David Dowling reports a relationship with Merck Research Laboratories that includes: consulting or advisory. Ofer Levy, David Dowling, Sharon Levy has patent pending to Boston Children’s Hospital. Dr. Asimenia Angelidou and Dr. Ofer Levy are guest editors at Vaccine. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.]., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in older adults resident in long-term care settings (LTC) report heterogenous outcomes, hampering the identification of effective management strategies for this important condition. Our objective was to develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set (COS) for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in this population., Methods: We used a rigorous COS development process including qualitative interviews with family members and staff with experience of delirium in LTC; a modified two-round Delphi survey; and virtual consensus meetings using nominal group technique. The study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative (https://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/796)., Results: Item generation identified 22 delirium-specific outcomes and 32 other outcomes from 18 qualitative interviews. When combined with outcomes identified in our earlier systematic review, and following an item reduction step, this gave 43 outcomes that advanced to the formal consensus processes. These involved 169 participants from 12 countries, and included healthcare professionals (121, 72%), researchers (24, 14%), and family members/people with experience of delirium (24, 14%). Six outcomes were identified as essential to include in all trials of interventions for delirium in LTC, and were therefore included in the COS. These are: 'delirium occurrence'; 'delirium related distress'; 'delirium severity'; 'cognition including memory', 'admission to hospital' and 'mortality'., Conclusions: This COS, endorsed by the American Delirium Society and the European and Australasian Delirium Associations, is recommended for use in future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions for older adults residing in LTC., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Falls in hospital remain a common and costly patient safety issue internationally. There is evidence that falls in hospitals can be prevented by multifactorial programs and by education for patients and staff, but these are often not routinely or effectively implemented in practice. Perspectives of multiple key stakeholder groups could inform implementation of fall prevention strategies., Methods: Clinicians of different disciplines, patients and their families were recruited from wards at two acute public hospitals. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted to gain a broad understanding of participants' perspectives about implementing fall prevention programs. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach., Results: Data from 50 participants revealed three key themes across the stakeholder groups shaping implementation of acute hospital fall prevention programs: (i) 'Fall prevention is a priority, but whose?' where participants agreed falls in hospital should be addressed but did not necessarily see themselves as responsible for this; (ii) 'Disempowered stakeholders' where participants expressed feeling frustrated and powerless with fall prevention in acute hospital settings; and (iii) 'Shared responsibility may be a solution' where participants were optimistic about the positive impact of collective action on effectively implementing fall prevention strategies., Conclusion: Key stakeholder groups agree that hospital fall prevention is a priority, however, challenges related to role perception, competing priorities, workforce pressure and disempowerment mean fall prevention may often be neglected in practice. Improving shared responsibility for fall prevention implementation across disciplines, organisational levels and patients, family and staff may help overcome this., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Introduction: In the United Kingdom, there are a growing number of specialist dementia nurses called Admiral Nurses. Admiral Nurses, supported in their professional development and clinical supervision by the charity Dementia UK, work with families affected by dementia using a relationship-centred approach. Given the growing need for this type of support, Dementia UK is committed to research that will expand the evidence base for Admiral Nursing. This article describes a stakeholder consultation to identify research priorities for Admiral Nursing for the next 3 years (2023-2026)., Methods: We adopted a participatory approach using an adapted Nominal Group Technique and priority-setting workshop. All elements of the process were designed in consultation with a steering group comprising a range of stakeholders, including people with dementia, carers, Admiral Nurses, Dementia UK staff and researchers. Stakeholders were identified as those who were likely to be affected by or interested in the emerging research priorities. Nominal groups were held both face-to-face and online. A total of 144 people shared their research priorities. Data generated through each nominal group were thematically analysed and then ranked in order of priority., Results: Four themes reflecting research priority areas were taken to a priority-setting workshop for consideration. This resulted in three research priorities for Admiral Nursing: (1) people with dementia who live alone and carers who provide support from a distance; (2) people living with young onset and rarer dementia and their families; and (3) people living with multiple health conditions alongside dementia, including mental health problems. Risk, diversity and the effectiveness of Admiral Nursing were strands that ran throughout these themes., Conclusions: We identified shared research priorities for Admiral Nursing using a rigorous, consensus-driven approach involving key stakeholders. These priorities reflect a desire to ensure that Admiral Nursing services reach the most vulnerable people living with dementia and their families and respond to the widening health and social care inequalities faced by this group., Patient and Public Contribution: People with dementia and carers were involved in the design of this process as members of our steering group and through consultation on our initial plans with Dementia UK's Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP). People living with dementia and carers also participated in consultation groups to share their views on research priorities. All stakeholders were invited to share feedback on the themes as part of the analysis and interpretation of the priorities, and a meeting was held with LEAP to discuss the emerging priorities., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Given the many challenges of conducting research that addresses the palliative and end-of-life care needs of patients with serious illnesses, stakeholder engagement starting from the moment of study conceptualization and design is critical to ensure successful participant recruitment, data collection, intervention delivery, data analysis, and dissemination., Methods: Guided by a conceptual model published by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) entitled, "Measuring What Matters for Advancing the Science and Practice of Engagement"14 and with the support of a PCORI Engagement Officer, representatives from 9 PCORI-funded study teams formed a working group to survey team members and review, outline, and describe key lessons learned and best practices for promoting stakeholder engagement in palliative care research., Results: Almost all study teams engaged with patients/caregivers, clinicians, researchers, and health care system experts as stakeholder partners. About half the teams also included payers and training institutions as part of their stakeholder advisors as well as a range of content experts. Study teams relied on a variety of support structures and resources, and they employed 10 distinct methods for maintaining engagement. All engagement methods were generally considered to be effective by teams who used the method, though there was some variability in team-rated engagement quality of each method. Nine barriers to stakeholder engagement were identified across the 9 studies as well as 9 strategies (or facilitators) to overcome these barriers. We share examples of how stakeholder engagement impacted studies in all phases, including the preparatory phase, study initiation phase, execution phase, and data analysis/dissemination phase., Conclusions: Teams utilized a variety of resources and support structures as well as capitalized on multiple engagement methods for fostering stakeholder engagement, resulting in a high level of collaboration and integration., Competing Interests: S.E. received grant funding for palliative care-related research/work from the California Healthcare Foundation, Blue Shield of California, and Stupski Foundation. A.K.C. received honoraria payments for participating on a national Advisory Committee that began in June 2023. J.A.G. has received research funding from Blue Note Therapeutics, remuneration from BeiGene for serving as an advisory board member, and royalties from Oxford University Press. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Older adults with chronic or acute cognitive impairment, such as dementia or delirium, who are hospitalized face unique barriers to person-centered care and a higher risk for negative outcomes stemming from hospitalizations. There is a need for co-designed interventions adapted for these patients to the hospital setting to improve care and outcomes. Patient life storytelling interventions have demonstrated promise in enhancing person-centered care by improving patient-care team relationships and providing information to enable care tailored to individual needs and values., Objective: This study aims to engage patients, care partners, and clinical stakeholders in a co-design process to adapt an existing life storytelling model for use with older adults with dementia and at risk of delirium in the acute care hospital setting., Methods: We recruited patients with dementia or at risk of delirium who were hospitalized, their care partners, clinicians, and informaticists. A 3-stage co-design process that used a mixed methods data collection approach including in-depth interviews and surveys was completed. We used content analysis to analyze qualitative data and descriptive statistics to summarize quantitative data., Results: In total, 27 stakeholder informants (ie, patients, care partners, and interdisciplinary care team [IDT] members) participated. Stakeholders were unanimously interested in using patient life stories as a tool for hospital care through electronic health record (EHR) integration. Stakeholders shared potential topics for life stories to cover, including social support, information on patients' key life events, and favorite activities. Participants provided insights into the logistics of integrating life stories into acute care, including interview arrangement, story-sharing methods, and barriers and facilitators. IDT members shared preferences on EHR integration, resulting in 3 co-designed mock-ups of EHR integration options. Stakeholders shared ways to optimize future acceptability and uptake, including engaging with the care team and promoting awareness of life stories, ensuring suitability to the acute environment (eg, distilling information in an easily digestible way), and addressing concerns for patient capacity and privacy (eg, engaging care partners when appropriate). Thoughts on potential impacts of life stories were also elicited, including improving patient- and care partner-IDT member relationships; humanizing patients; increasing clinical team, patient, and caregiver satisfaction; and enabling more specific, tailored care for patients with dementia and at risk of delirium., Conclusions: This study resulted in a co-designed life storytelling intervention for patients with dementia and at risk for delirium in an acute care hospital setting. Stakeholders provided valuable information to ensure future intervention acceptability and uptake, including potential benefits, facilitators, and challenges in the acute care setting., (©Sarah J Flessa, James D Harrison, Roniela Turnigan, Megan Rathfon, Michael Chandler, Jay Newton-Small, Stephanie E Rogers. Originally published in JMIR Aging (https://aging.jmir.org), 27.09.2024.)

Purpose: COVID-19 has caused unprecedented disruption to health systems. There is much to be gained by capturing what was learned from changes and adaptations made by health services and systems. The Ministry of Health in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, sought to prioritise health services research (HSR) to address critical issues arising from the COVID-19 pandemic. We tested a priority setting methodology to create priorities for a specific funding opportunity and to extract generalisable lessons., Design/methodology/approach: A virtual roundtable meeting of key stakeholders was held in June 2020. We used a modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT) for priority setting, with potential items ( n  = 35) grouped under headings. Data was analysed through a reflective deliberative process., Findings: We engaged 89 senior policy makers, health service executives, clinicians and researchers in the roundtable. The NGT proved an efficient method with participants reaching consensus on eight priorities. Findings included strong support for learning from the rapid response to COVID-19 and addressing needs of vulnerable populations and the health workforce. Opinions differed about strategic areas investment and where learnings should be via internal evaluation rather than funded research. Three of the eight recommended priorities were included in the funding opportunity., Research Limitations/implications: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) required unprecedented change and adaptations within health systems, and rapid, applied health services research can help to create, understand and (where relevant) sustain change beyond the immediate impact of the pandemic. While final decisions may be dependent on a wider range of considerations by government, stakeholder enthusiasm for engagement in priority setting exercises may be dampened if they do not perceive their application in decision-making., Practical Implications: A modified nominal group technique can be used to set research priorities in constrained conditions by engaging large numbers of stakeholders in rankings and then using an online delivery of a roundtable and to reach consensus on priorities in real time. Recommended priorities for health services research can be readily generated through rapid engagement but does not guarantee their application., Social Implications: Australia's swift response to COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 was perceived as a relative success due to the rapid public health and policy response and a relatively low number of cases. This response was underpinned by systematic knowledge mobilisation including support for targeted and prioritised health services research to fill knowledge gaps., Originality/value: Setting priority processes can provide rich, engaged input to support government funding decisions about HSR. A wide range of dynamic and iterative processes influence decision-making in a rapidly evolving situation in the health system response to COVID-19. It is crucial to consider how major investment decisions will support a value-based healthcare system., (© Nicole M. Rankin, Don Nutbeam, Jean-Frederic Levesque, Henry Ko, Garry Jennings, Adam Walczak and Christine Jorm.)

Meaningful engagement with stakeholders in research demands intentional approaches. This paper describes the development of a framework to guide stakeholder engagement as research partners in a pragmatic trial proposed to evaluate behavioral interventions for dysphagia in head and neck cancer patients. We highlight the core principles of stakeholder engagement including representation of all perspectives, meaningful participation, respectful partnership with stakeholders, and accountability to stakeholders; and describe how these principles were operationalized to engage relevant stakeholders throughout the course of a large clinical trial., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Much remains unknown about how complex community-based programmes can successfully achieve long-term impact. More insight is needed to understand the key mechanisms through which these programmes work. Therefore, we conducted an in-depth study in five communities that implemented the Healthy Youth, Healthy Future (JOGG) approach, a Dutch community-based obesity prevention programme. We aimed to identify perceived outcomes and long-term impacts among local stakeholders and explore potential causal pathways and working mechanisms., Methods: We used ripple effects mapping (REM), a qualitative participatory method to map outcomes and identify causal pathways, in five communities. We involved 26 stakeholders, professionals and policy-makers affiliated with the local JOGG approach, spread over eight REM sessions and conducted individual interviews with 24 additional stakeholders. To uncover working mechanisms, we compared outcomes and causal pathways across communities., Results: Over 5-9 years of implementation, participants perceived that JOGG had improved ownership of local stakeholders, health policies, intersectoral collaboration and social norms towards promoting healthy lifestyles. Causal pathways comprised small initial outcomes that created the preconditions to enable the achievement of long-term impact. Although exact JOGG actions varied widely between communities, we identified five common working mechanisms through which the JOGG approach contributed to causal pathways: (1) creating a positive connotation with JOGG, (2) mobilizing stakeholders to participate in the JOGG approach, (3) facilitating projects to promote knowledge and awareness among stakeholders while creating successful experiences with promoting healthy lifestyles, (4) connecting stakeholders, thereby stimulating intersectoral collaboration and (5) sharing stakeholder successes that promote healthy lifestyles, which gradually created a social norm of participation., Conclusions: The JOGG approach seems to work through activating initial stakeholder participation and bolstering the process towards ownership, policy change, and intersectoral collaboration to promote healthy lifestyles. Key working mechanisms can inform further development of JOGG as well as other complex community-based prevention programmes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The impacts of disease and treatment on a patient's family members and informal caregivers are known as "family spillover effects." Although many formal value frameworks call for the consideration of these effects, they are often not included in health technology assessments (HTAs) and cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). A formal evaluation of stakeholder perspectives may help address the disconnect for inclusion of family spillover effects observed in practice., Objective: To develop stakeholder-driven recommendations for the measurement and use of family spillover effects in the United States and to identify research opportunities., Methods: We first conducted a targeted literature review of US-based CEAs and HTA reports from the past 10 years to assess the current use of family spillover effects. We then used a purposeful sampling technique to conduct 25 qualitative interviews with outcomes researchers, patient advocates, health economists, and health policy and payer experts to gather perspectives on when and how family spillover effects should be considered in HTA processes. We conducted a thematic analysis of the interview transcripts to identify key themes and develop preliminary recommendations. Finally, we conducted an online workshop with 8 stakeholders to discuss, rate, and refine preliminary recommendations to develop final recommendations., Results: A key theme identified in the stakeholder interviews was the role that data availability, analyst preferences, and prior precedence play in limiting the inclusion of spillover effects in HTAs. Additional themes included support for the inclusion of both qualitative and quantitative spillover effects and the need to capture broad and diverse impacts across populations. We developed 15 recommendations from the consensus building workshop addressing measurement, CEA modeling, and HTA processes. Key recommendations included (1) a transparent process for deciding when family spillover effects should be included, (2) measurement of direct and indirect costs with priority based on the magnitude of impact, (3) the use of validated measures, (4) the use of proxy information and expert elicitation when quality data are unavailable, and (5) the use of a modified impact inventory table for transparency of included effects. Research opportunities included patient involvement in family spillover effect research and HTAs, mapping algorithms and non-preference-based caregiver measures to generate utilities, and consensus best practices for modeling., Conclusions: The inconsistent inclusion of family spillover effects in HTAs and CEAs remains a persistent challenge. The stakeholder-driven recommendations and research opportunities identified in this study may help improve the transparency, measurement, and use of family spillover effects in assessing the clinical and economic value of novel medical technologies.

Background: Antipsychotic prescribing in United States nursing homes (NHs) has decreased since the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Service debuted the National Partnership to Improve Dementia Care in Nursing Homes (NP); however, reductions have stalled. To help explain persistent antipsychotic use despite the NP's reduction efforts, the perspectives of diverse NP stakeholders were qualitatively assessed. This study aimed to re-evaluate these individual perspectives in combined thematic synthesis to discover NP improvement opportunities undetectable in single stakeholder assessments., Methods: Thematic synthesis. Through immersive crystallisation, original source coding results were organised into related descriptive themes. Similarities and differences were identified, and descriptive themes were regrouped into new, increasingly abstract, analytical themes. This cycle continued until variances were resolved and analytic themes sufficiently described and explained all initial descriptive themes., Results: Three analytic themes emerged regarding NP improvement opportunities. The NP's positive impacts would be augmented by: (i) a deeper and expanded appreciation of stakeholder perspectives; (ii) more urgent and rapid adaptation to unintended adverse outcomes; and (iii) greater recognition of the contextual and environmental factors influencing decisions to prescribe or not prescribe antipsychotic medications. Stakeholder groups described: perspectives they perceived as inadequately considered by the NP; insufficient NP engagement with the stakeholders capable of creating evidenced, affordable, and available non-pharmacologic therapies for dementia symptoms; recognition that dementia interventions effective for a specific individual at a specific time in a specific community may not generalise; and diverse ongoing undesirable outcomes from NP policies that could be mitigated by NP modifications., Conclusions: The NP has done much to advance dementia care in NHs. Notwithstanding, these results suggest the NP would only be improved through increasingly comprehensive inclusion of stakeholder perspectives, enhanced incorporation of individual contextual factors, and a more decisive mechanism for ongoing and continual adaptation., (© 2024 Japanese Psychogeriatric Society.)

Our objective is to implement a single-case experimental design (SCED) infrastructure in combination with experience-sampling methods (ESM) into the standard diagnostic procedure of a German outpatient research and training clinic. Building on the idea of routine outcome monitoring, the SCED infrastructure introduces intensive longitudinal data collection, individual effectiveness measures, and the opportunity for systematic manipulation to push personalization efforts further. It aims to empower psychotherapists and patients to evaluate their own treatment (idiographic perspective) and to enable researchers to analyze open questions of personalized psychotherapy (nomothetic perspective). Organized around the principles of agile research, we plan to develop, implement, and evaluate the SCED infrastructure in six successive studies with continuous stakeholder involvement: In the project development phase, the business model for the SCED infrastructure is developed that describes its vision in consideration of the context (Study 1). Also, the infrastructure's prototype is specified, encompassing the SCED procedure, ESM protocol, and ESM survey (Study 2 and 3). During the optimization phase, feasibility and acceptability are tested and the infrastructure is adapted accordingly (Study 4). The evaluation phase includes a pilot implementation study to assess implementation outcomes (Study 5), followed by actual implementation using a within-institution A-B design (Study 6). The sustainability phase involves continuous monitoring and improvement. We discuss to what extent the generated data could be used to address current questions of personalized psychotherapy research. Anticipated barriers and limitations during the implementation processes are outlined., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The way the road transport system is developed in a country affects safety. This study aims to identify the roles and relationships of road transport stakeholders and to explore the understanding of control and feedback mechanisms and associated gaps influencing road safety. A System-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) model was applied to document and interview data ( n  = 30). Participants emphasised the hindrance of overlapping mandates among stakeholders on the road transport system's operations and underlined the roles of coalitions for road safety as system enablers. Further, the withdrawal of some controls by international agencies can increase system vulnerability. Most importantly, critical control and feedback gaps were shown to increase risks for safety within the road transport system. The findings underscore the complexity of the road transport system and add to the discussion on a system's approach to road safety. Practitioner summary: Using a STAMP methodology, we extensively studied the road transport system in Tanzania. Road transport stakeholders were identified through the review of documents, interviews were conducted, and the main findings were discussed. Control and feedback mechanisms and associated gaps were critically presented, recommendations were proposed, and policy implications were suggested.

Introduction: Coaching interventions in graduate medical education have proven successful in increasing technical and communication skills, reducing errors, and improving patient care. Effective stakeholder engagement enhances the relevance, value, and long-term sustainability of interventions, yet specific strategies for stakeholder engagement remain uncertain. The purpose of this article is to identify strategies to foster engagement of diverse stakeholder groups in coaching interventions., Material and Methods: We conducted 35 semi-structured interviews between November 2021 and April 2022 with purposively sampled key stakeholders that captured participants' perspectives on physicians' communication training needs, roles, and involvement in, as well as contextual factors, facilitators, barriers, and improvement strategies of the multi-departmental Communication Coaching Program at our institution. We utilized the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research to guide data collection and analysis. An analytic approach relied on team-based thematic analysis with high inter-coder agreement between three raters (Cohen's kappa coefficient 0.83). Several validation techniques were used to enhance the credibility and trustworthiness of the study., Results: Analysis of transcribed interviews with stakeholders directly involved in the Communication Coaching Program, including 10 residents, 10 faculty coaches, 9 medical education leaders, and 8 programmatic sponsors, revealed five key engagement strategies: (1) embrace collaborative design, (2) enable flexible adjustments and modifications, (3) secure funding, (4) identify champions, and (5) demonstrate outcomes. Additionally, a patient-centered approach to delivering the best possible patient care emerged as a primary objective that linked all stakeholder groups., Discussion: Evaluating the experiences of key stakeholders in the Communication Coaching Program helped identify targetable strategies to facilitate participant engagement across all organizational levels. The analysis also revealed universal alignment around the importance of providing high-quality patient care. Insights from this work provide guidance for clinical training programs moving toward the implementation of coaching interventions.

Purpose: There are several factors that negatively impact the well-being of those working in the screen industry. Consequently, the need to introduce Well-being Coordinators has been identified. This study explored the experiences of participants who undertook a Well-being Coordination course tailored for the screen sector. Additionally, it sought to delve into perspectives regarding well-being within the screen industry., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted. The study was guided by an interpretive descriptive approach. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyse data., Findings: Five themes were identified: Opportunities and challenges working in the screen industry, co-existing with harassment, the need for change: importance of wellbeing, becoming a well-being co-ordinator: learning from the course, and the future of the well-being co-ordinator role: opportunities and challenges. The reality that cast and crew co-exist with several forms of harassment within the industry was noted. Despite this, there is hope for the future of the screen sector, particularly the positive impact the role of the Well-being Coordinator could have., Conclusions: The experiences of professionals across the screen industry vary; however, a pervasive culture of bullying and harassment is commonplace. Through the introduction of Well-being Coordinators, there is the potential to enact positive change.

Objectives: This study aimed to develop and apply a structured approach for prioritising topics for systematic reviews in public health, framed according to the readily applicable PICO format, which encourages the involvement of stakeholders' preferences in a transparent matter., Methods: We developed a multi-stage process, consisting of a scoping and two Delphi stages with web-based surveys and invited public health stakeholders in Switzerland to participate: First, respondents specified topics for different public health domains, which were reformulated in a PICO format by content analysis. Second, respondents rated the topics using five stakeholder-refined assessment criteria. Overall rankings were calculated to assess differences between stakeholder groups and rating criteria., Results: In total, 215 respondents suggested 728 topics altogether. The response rate in the two Delphi stages was 91.6% and 77.6%, respectively. Most top-rated review topics focused on the effectiveness of interventions providing education to different target groups, followed by interventions to increase access to specific healthcare services., Conclusion: Our approach encourages involvement of stakeholders in identifying priorities for systematic reviews and highlights disparities between stakeholders and between individual criteria., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Hoekstra, Mütsch, Borchard, Kien, Griebler, Von Elm, Rehfuess, Gerhardus and Lhachimi.)

Background: Countries in the Middle East have some of the lowest rates of physical activity and some of the highest rates of obesity in the world. Policies can influence population levels of physical activity. However, there is a dearth of research on physical activity policies in the Gulf region. This qualitative study analyses cross-sectoral barriers and facilitators for the development, implementation and evaluation of physical activity policies in Saudi Arabia and Oman, two of the largest countries in the region., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 senior policymakers from the Ministries of Health, Education, and Sport in Saudi Arabia and Oman, and were examined using thematic analysis., Results: We identified seven themes related to physical activity policies in Saudi Arabia and Oman: leadership; existing policies; physical activity programs related to policies; private sector policies; challenges; data/monitoring; and future opportunities. Both countries have a central document that guides policy-makers in promoting physical activity, and the available policies in both countries are implemented via multiple programs and initiatives to increase physical activity. Compared with Oman, in Saudi Arabia, programs from the non-profit sector, represented by community groups, play a more significant role in promoting physical activity outside the government framework. The private sector has contributed to promoting physical activity in both countries, but interviewees stated that more financial support is required. Policy limitations differ between Saudi Arabia and Oman: intersectoral collaboration in Oman is limited and mainly based on individuals' own initiative, while the health transformation in Saudi Arabia tends to slow down policy implementation in relevant areas. Physical education in Saudi Arabia and Oman is similar; however, increased support and collaboration between government agencies and the private sector for out-of-school sports academies are needed., Conclusions: This study addresses key gaps in analysing physical activity policies in Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Our study highlights the importance of increasing financial support, improving collaboration between governmental agencies and between them and the private sector and consolidating efforts to back physical activity policies and dismantle cross-sectoral barriers in Saudi Arabia and Oman. Educational institutions in Saudi Arabia and Oman play a crucial role in promoting physical activity from early childhood to young adults. Our insights assist policy-makers, public health officials and stakeholders in shaping effective physical activity-promoting policies, programs and interventions to prevent non-communicable diseases. Challenges identified in Saudi Arabia and Oman's policies will inform their future development., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Setting and implementing evidence-informed health service packages (HSPs) is crucial for improving health and demonstrating the effective use of evidence in real-world settings. Despite extensive training for large groups on evidence generation and utilization and establishing structures such as evidence-generation entities in many countries, the institutionalization of setting and implementing evidence-informed HSPs remains unachieved. This study aims to review the actions taken to set the HSP in Iran and to identify the challenges of institutionalizing the evidence-informed priority-setting process., Methods: Relevant documents were obtained through website search, Google queries, expert consultations and library manual search. Subsequently, we conducted nine qualitative semi-structured interviews with stakeholders. The participants were purposively sampled to represent diverse backgrounds relevant to health policymaking and financing. These interviews were meticulously audio-recorded, transcribed and reviewed. We employed the framework analysis approach, guided by the Kuchenmüller et al. framework, to interpret data., Results: Efforts to incorporate evidence-informed process in setting HSP in Iran began in the 1970s in the pilot project of primary health care. These initiatives continued through the Health Transformation Plan in 2015 and targeted disease-specific efforts in 2019 in recent years. However, full institutionalization remains a challenge. The principal challenges encompass legal gaps, methodological diversity, fragile partnerships, leadership changeovers, inadequate financial backing of HSP and the dearth of an accountability culture. These factors impede the seamless integration and enduring sustainability of evidence-informed practices, hindering collaborative decision-making and optimal resource allocation., Conclusions: Technical aspects of using evidence for policymaking alone will not ensure sustainability unless it achieves the necessary requirements for institutionalization. While addressing all challenges is crucial, the primary focus should be on required transparency and accountability, public participation with an intersectionality lens and making this process resilience to shocks. It is imperative to establish a robust legal framework and a strong and sustainable political commitment to embrace and drive change, ensuring sustainable progress., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Digital technologies, such as wearable devices and smartphone applications (apps), can enable the decentralisation of clinical trials by measuring endpoints in people's chosen locations rather than in traditional clinical settings. Digital endpoints can allow high-frequency and sensitive measurements of health outcomes compared to visit-based endpoints which provide an episodic snapshot of a person's health. However, there are underexplored challenges in this emerging space that require interdisciplinary and cross-sector collaboration. A multi-stakeholder Knowledge Exchange event was organised to facilitate conversations across silos within this research ecosystem., Methods: A survey was sent to an initial list of stakeholders to identify potential discussion topics. Additional stakeholders were identified through iterative discussions on perspectives that needed representation. Co-design meetings with attendees were held to discuss the scope, format and ethos of the event. The event itself featured a cross-disciplinary selection of talks, a panel discussion, small-group discussions facilitated via a rolling seating plan and audience participation via Slido. A transcript was generated from the day, which, together with the output from Slido, provided a record of the day's discussions. Finally, meetings were held following the event to identify the key challenges for digital endpoints which emerged and reflections and recommendations for dissemination., Results: Several challenges for digital endpoints were identified in the following areas: patient adherence and acceptability; algorithms and software for devices; design, analysis and conduct of clinical trials with digital endpoints; the environmental impact of digital endpoints; and the need for ongoing ethical support. Learnings taken for next generation events include the need to include additional stakeholder perspectives, such as those of funders and regulators, and the need for additional resources and facilitation to allow patient and public contributors to engage meaningfully during the event., Conclusions: The event emphasised the importance of consortium building and highlighted the critical role that collaborative, multi-disciplinary, and cross-sector efforts play in driving innovation in research design and strategic partnership building moving forward. This necessitates enhanced recognition by funders to support multi-stakeholder projects with patient involvement, standardised terminology, and the utilisation of open-source software., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Built environment interventions provide structural solutions to complex urban challenges. Though community voices are part of municipal decision-making, planners and public health professionals need tools to better integrate their perspectives for desired changes (what) when implementing built environment interventions (how). We present two simultaneous concept mapping exercises conducted in Montréal, Canada, to facilitate the consideration of these dimensions., Methods: Community members were prompted about neighbourhood changes that could improve their quality of life; stakeholders were prompted about factors that contribute to successful implementation of interventions. Through each exercise, items were generated, grouped, and rated on importance and feasibility. Concept maps were produced using multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. The clusters identified by community members and stakeholders were combined into a Community × Stakeholder Matrix, which supported discussions on interventions with the research's Advisory Committee., Results: Thirty-two community members generated 41 responses, which resulted in 6 clusters: (1) strengthen public transportation, (2) reduce space dedicated to cars, (3) foster local social connections, (4) develop quality cycling infrastructure, (5) improve pedestrian accessibility, and (6) green the city. Thirty-seven stakeholders generated 40 items, which resulted in 5 clusters: (1) collaboration with stakeholders and citizens, (2) planning and evaluation, (3) common vision for the future, (4) regulatory framework and funding, and (5) context-informed approach., Conclusion: Capturing the collective vision of our urban environments and the processes underlying change through concept mapping can lead to more successful changes. We propose combining understandings of the what and how into a matrix to support evaluation and strategic planning of interventions and better integrate community voices into operational planning., (© 2024. The Author(s) under exclusive license to The Canadian Public Health Association.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to engage key stakeholders in a health research priority-setting process to identify, prioritize and produce a community-driven list of research questions addressing intersectional issues on mental health and addictions (MHA) in acquired brain injury (ABI)., Methods: A multiphasic health research priority-setting process was co-designed and executed with community-based stakeholders, including researchers, health professionals, clinicians, service providers, representatives from brain injury associations, policy makers and people with lived experience of ABI and MHA, including patients and their family members. Stakeholders' ideas led to the generation of research questions, which were prioritized at a 1-day workshop., Results: Fifty-nine stakeholders participated in the priority-setting activity during the workshop, which resulted in a rank-ordered list of the top 10 questions for research addressing the intersections of ABI and MHA. Questions identified touched on several pressing issues (e.g., opioid crisis, homelessness), encompassed multiple subtypes of ABI (e.g., hypoxic-ischaemic, mild traumatic), and involved different domains (e.g., identification, intervention) of health research., Conclusions: This community-driven health research priority-setting study identified and prioritized research questions addressing the intersections of ABI and MHA. Researchers and funding agencies should use this list to inform their agendas and address stakeholders' most urgent needs, fostering meaningful improvements to clinical services., Patient or Public Contribution: An 11-person working group comprised of people with lived experience, service providers, researchers, healthcare professionals and other key stakeholders collaboratively developed and informed the scope, design, methodology and interpretation of this study. Over 50 community-based stakeholders contributed to the research priority-setting activity. One co-author is a person with lived experience., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The engagement of community partners in equitable partnerships with academic teams is necessary to achieve health equity. However, there is no standardized approach to support bidirectional engagement among research stakeholders in the context of partnership equity at each phase of the research process., Objective: We describe the development of a systematic framework along with competencies and tools promoting bidirectional engagement and equity within community-academic partnerships at each phase of the research process., Design: We conducted a four-step research process between November 2020 and December 2023 for framework development: (1) a narrative literature review; (2) expansion of existing bidirectional, equitable framework; (3) a scientific review with two groups of cognitive interviews (five community engagement researchers and five community leaders and members); and (4) three community-based organization leader focus groups. Thematic analysis was used to analyse focus group data., Results: Using results of each step, the framework was iteratively developed, yielding four phases of the bidirectional engagement and equity (BEE) research framework: Relationship building and assessment of goals and resources (Phase I); form a community-academic partnership based on shared research interests (may include multilevel stakeholders) (Phase II); develop a research team comprising members from each partnering organization (Phase III); and implement the six-step equitable research process (Phase IV). Bidirectional learning and partnership principles are at the core of the partnership, particularly in Phases II-IV. Competencies and tools for conducting an equitable, engaged research process were provided., Discussion: This conceptual framework offers a novel, stepwise approach and competencies for community-academic partners to successfully partner and conduct the research process equitably., Conclusion: The BEE research framework can be implemented to standardize the conduct of an equitable, engaged research process within a community-academic partnership, while improving knowledge and trust across partners and, ultimately, an increased return on investment and sustainability to benefit both partners in the area of health outcomes and ultimately health equity., Patient or Public Contribution: The development of this framework was co-led with a community organization in which two leaders in the organization were equitably involved in each phase of the research process, including grant development, study design, participant recruitment, protocol development for focus groups and community and researcher review, framework design and content and dissemination of this manuscript as a co-author. For grant development, the community leader completed the give-get grid components for them as a partner. They also wrote up their lived experience in the research process for the progress report. For the focus groups, one community leader co-led the focus group with the academic partner. For the narrative review, the community leaders did not actively conduct the narrative review but observed the process through the academic partners. One community leader wrote the section 'relationship building' and 'bidirectional learning' sections with the assistance of the academic partner, while they both equally provided input on other sections of the manuscript alongside academic partners. The community leaders have extensive experience in leading programmes, along with partnering with researchers to address health equity issues and improve health outcomes., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Dementia impairs the ability of people with dementia to be autonomous and independent. They need support from third parties, who should ideally respect their autonomy and independence as much as possible. Supporting people with dementia can be very burdensome for caregivers and numbers of patients increase while numbers of potential caregivers decline. Digital assistive technologies (DATs) that directly support patients or their caregivers may help bridging the increasing gap between need of support and available resources. DATs have the potential to preserve the autonomy and independence of people with dementia and promote their abilities, if they are properly designed in close interaction with future users. In our study, we focused on ethical concerns, technological requirements, and implementation criteria for DAT in general and specifically to support outdoor mobility of people with dementia., Methods: We applied a qualitative approach and conducted a World Café (2 tables, n = 7) and an online focus group (n = 6) with people with dementia, relatives, healthcare professionals, scientists, ethics experts, and experts for digitally-assisted medical care. We descriptively analyzed the data using a content analysis approach., Results: The participants reported technological (e.g., lack of Wi-Fi), financial (e.g., expensive devices or lack of budget for DATs), political (e.g., legal hurdles such as the European Medical Device Law or data protection regulations) as well as user-related hurdles (e.g., lack of digital competence) for the implementation of DAT in dementia care. Among the issues discussed were the importance of autonomy, independence, safety, privacy, and questions of decision making capacity in DAT's use. Participants identified opportunities and benefits in self-learning, situation-aware DATs and wished for dementia-friendly communities. They emphasized the value of personal interaction that should not be replaced, but rather supported by DAT., Conclusion: The results revealed multiple hurdles and ethical concerns for DAT use and provided recommendations for designing and implementing DATs. Further investigations are needed on the impact of DAT on personal interactions in caregiving and the role of DAT in dementia-friendly communities., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Digital technologies can bring about fundamental changes in corporate processes, which may result in a shift from process innovation to digital process innovation. However, owing to resource constraints and various stakeholders, digital process implementation is extremely challenging for firms. Based on stakeholder theory, this study explores whether and how stakeholder pressure for digitalization can facilitate corporate digital process innovation and unravels the mediating effect of routine reconfiguration and the moderating effect of strategic flexibility. The findings from a survey of 351 firms prove that stakeholder pressure for digitalization can facilitate corporate digital process innovation via routine reconfiguration. Moreover, this study finds that increased strategic flexibility can strengthen the positive mediating effect of routine reconfiguration. The findings contribute to the deep understanding of digital process innovation and offer a boundary condition for the effectiveness of stakeholder pressure., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Jin et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: n-of-1 trials are undertaken to optimise the evaluation of health technologies in individual patients. They involve a single patient receiving treatments, both interventional and control, consecutively over set periods of time, the order of which is decided at random. Although n-of-1 trials are undertaken in medical research it could be argued they have the utility to be undertaken more frequently. We undertook the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) commissioned DIAMOND (Development of generalisable methodology for n-of-1 trials delivery for very low volume treatments) project to develop key points to assist clinicians and researchers in designing and conducting n-of-1 trials., Methods: The key points were developed by undertaking a stakeholder workshop, followed by a discussion within the study team and then a stakeholder dissemination and feedback event. The stakeholder workshop sought to gain the perspectives of a variety of stakeholders (including clinicians, researchers and patient representatives) on the design and use of n-of-1 trials. A discussion between the study team was held to reflect on the workshop and draft the key points. Lastly, the stakeholders from the workshop were invited to a dissemination and feedback session where the proposed key points were presented and their feedback gained., Results: A set of 22 key points were developed based on the insights from the workshop and subsequent discussions. They provide guidance on when an n-of-1 trial might be a viable or appropriate study design and discuss key decisions involved in the design of n-of-1 trials, including determining an appropriate number of treatment periods and cycles, the choice of comparator, recommended approaches to randomisation and blinding, the use of washout periods and approaches to analysis., Conclusions: The key points developed in the project will support clinical researchers to understand key considerations when designing n-of-1 trials. It is hoped they will support the wider implementation of the study design., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The European Regulation on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA R), effective since January 2022, aims to harmonize and improve the efficiency of common HTA across Member States (MS), with a phased implementation from January 2025. At "midterms" of the preparation phase for the implementation of the Regulation our aim was to identify and prioritize tangible action points to move forward., Methods: During the 2023 Spring Convention of the European Access Academy (EAA), participants from different nationalities and stakeholder backgrounds discussed readiness and remaining challenges for the Regulation's implementation and identified and prioritized action points. For this purpose, participants were assigned to four working groups: (i) Health Policy Challenges, (ii) Stakeholder Readiness, (iii) Approach to Uncertainty and (iv) Challenges regarding Methodology. Top four action points for each working group were identified and subsequently ranked by all participants during the final plenary session., Results: Overall "readiness" for the Regulation was perceived as neutral. Prioritized action points included the following: Health Policy, i.e. assess adjustability of MS laws and health policy processes; Stakeholders, i.e. capacity building; Uncertainty, i.e. implement HTA guidelines as living documents; Methodology, i.e. clarify the Population, Intervention, Comparator(s), Outcomes (PICO) identification process., Conclusions: At "midterms" of the preparation phase, the focus for the months to come is on executing the tangible action points identified at EAA's Spring Convention. All action points centre around three overarching themes: harmonization and standardization, capacity building and collaboration, uncertainty management and robust data. These themes will ultimately determine the success of the EU HTA R in the long run., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: National palliative care plans depend upon stakeholder engagement to succeed. Assessing the capability, interest, and knowledge of stakeholders is a crucial step in the implementation of public health initiatives, as recommended by the World Health Organisation. However, utilising stakeholder analysis is a strategy underused in public palliative care., Objective: To conduct a stakeholder analysis characterising a diverse group of stakeholders involved in implementing a national palliative care plan in three rural regions of an upper-middle-income country., Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study design, complemented by a quantitative stakeholder analysis approach, was executed through a survey designed to gauge stakeholders' levels of interest and capability in relation to five fundamental dimensions of public palliative care: provision of services, accessibility of essential medicines, palliative care education, financial support, and palliative care vitality. Stakeholders were categorised as promoters (high-power, high-interest), latent (high-power, low-interest), advocates (low-power, high-interest), and indifferent (low-power and low-interest). Stakeholder self-perceived category and knowledge level were also assessed., Results: Among the 65 surveyed stakeholders, 19 were categorised as promoters, 34 as advocates, 9 as latent, and 3 as indifferent. Stakeholders' self-perception of their category did not align with the results of the quantitative analysis. When evaluated by region and palliative care dimensions the distribution of stakeholders was nonuniform. Palliative care funding was the dimension with the highest number of stakeholders categorised as indifferent, and the lowest percentage of promoters. Stakeholders categorised as promoters consistently reported a low level of knowledge, regardless of the dimension, region, or their level of interest., Conclusions: Assessing the capability, interest, and knowledge of stakeholders is a crucial step when implementing public health initiatives in palliative care. It allows for a data-driven decision-making process on how to delegate responsibilities, administer financial resources, and establish governance boards that remain engaged and work efficiently., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Breastfeeding impacts positively on multiple health outcomes, but < 50% of UK women breastfeed at 8 weeks. Women with long-term conditions face additional challenges in breastfeeding., Objectives: To synthesise global and UK evidence to co-create an implementation and evaluation toolkit for cost-effective breastfeeding support in the NHS., Design: Evidence syntheses with stakeholder engagement., Review Methods: Systematic reviews examined effectiveness of breastfeeding support for (1) healthy women and (2) women with long-term conditions using Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group methods. Mixed-methods systematic reviews synthesised process evaluations of effective breastfeeding support interventions for healthy women and experiences of receiving/providing support for breastfeeding women with long-term conditions. Cross-study synthesis integrated qualitative and quantitative findings. Systematic reviews synthesised evidence on the incremental costs and cost-effectiveness of breastfeeding support following National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. All searches were conducted from May 2021 to October 2022. Stakeholder engagement and toolkit development comprised online discussions, a modified Delphi study, focus groups and four workshops. Participants were 23 stakeholders, 16 parents in the parents' panels, 15 women in the focus groups and 87 stakeholders who attended the workshops., Results: We found considerably more interventions designed for healthy women (review 1) than aimed at women with long-term conditions (reviews 1 and 4); approximately half of the studies were targeted at groups at higher risk of poor breastfeeding outcomes, and the impact of support may be different in these populations. Despite this, studies from review 2 found that women perceived the provision of support as positive, important and needed. Studies from review 5 echoed a range of suggestions from participants regarding potential strategies to improve breastfeeding support, with the most widely reported being the need to acknowledge the role and influence of other sources of support (e.g. partners, family, friends, peers, external professionals, web-based resources) and involving these sources in the provision of breastfeeding support for women with long-term conditions. In reviews 3 and 6, there was uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of breastfeeding support interventions due to the limited number of studies and lack of good-quality evidence., Limitations: There was a lack of evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of breastfeeding interventions in the UK. There was often insufficient information reported about intervention characteristics., Conclusions: 'Breastfeeding only' support probably reduces the number of women stopping any or exclusive breastfeeding. The evidence for 'breastfeeding plus' interventions is less consistent, but these may reduce the number of women stopping exclusive breastfeeding at 4-6 weeks and at 6 months. We found no evidence of differential intervention effects regarding mode of provision or provider. Cost-effectiveness is uncertain due to the lack of good-quality evidence. Key enablers of successful implementation were responsiveness and tailoring of interventions to both women's and supporters' needs. Breastfeeding support as delivered in the included studies probably has little to no effect on breastfeeding outcomes for women with long-term conditions. The mixed-methods synthesis and stakeholder work identified that existing interventions may not address the complex needs of these women. The main study output is a co-produced toolkit to guide implementation and evaluation of breastfeeding support services in the UK., Future Work: Evaluation of breastfeeding support for all women, particularly those at risk of poor breastfeeding outcomes (e.g. long-term conditions, deprivation). This could involve tailoring the toolkit to local contexts via implementation and effectiveness studies or using quality improvement studies., Study Registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42022337239, CRD42021229769 and CRD42022374509. The reviews of economic evidence were not registered; however, the review protocol can be accessed via the repository held by Queen's University Belfast Research Portal (https://pure.qub.ac.uk/)., Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR130995) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 20. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

In a landscape, perceptions can influence people's actions and behavior toward natural resource use. Improving landscape governance, therefore, requires understanding the different concerns of stakeholders operating within the landscape. This paper analyzes the perceptions of local stakeholders-local landscape users, practitioners engaged in conservation and sustainable resource use, and private actors-regarding the landscape governance system, using the Q-methodology to identify common concern entry points for the implementation of a landscape approach in the Western Wildlife Corridor (WWC) in northern Ghana. To this end, individual interviews and focus groups were conducted with local communities and organizations operating in three Community Resource Management Areas (CREMAs). They identified destructive livelihood activities, constrained livelihoods, and a weak governance system as the main challenges, and the need to balance livelihoods with conservation, strengthening landscape governance through the CREMA initiative, and awareness raising as the main solutions. Thus, the Q-method allowed identifying common concern entry points regarding landscape challenges, governance issues, and potential solutions. I argue that consensus among stakeholders regarding these challenges and solutions could lay the groundwork for a multi-stakeholder process in the area, which could help foster the implementation of an integrated landscape approach in the WWC landscape. It is crucial to support the livelihoods of local people to reduce pressures on natural resources. It is also important to strengthen the functioning of local CREMA management bodies with technical, logistical, and financial support. Implementing a participatory monitoring and evaluation mechanism is critical in this regard., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Nigeria commenced rollout of vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in March 2021 as part of the national public health response to the pandemic. Findings from appropriately contextualized cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) as part of a wider process involving health technology assessment (HTA) approaches have been important in informing decision-making in this area. In this paper we outline the processes that were followed to identify COVID-19 vaccine stakeholders involved in the selection, approval, funding, procurement and rollout of vaccines in Nigeria, and describe the process routes we identified to support uptake of HTA-related information for evidence-informed policy in Nigeria., Methods: Our approach to engaging with policy-makers and other stakeholders as part of an HTA of COVID vaccination in Nigeria consisted of three steps, namely: (i) informal discussions with key stakeholders; (ii) stakeholder mapping, analysis and engagement; and (iii) communication and dissemination strategies for the HTA-relevant evidence produced. The analysis of the stakeholder mapping uses the power/interest grid framework., Results: The informal discussion with key stakeholders generated six initial policy questions. Further discussions with policy-makers yielded three suitable policy questions for analysis: which COVID-19 vaccines should be bought; what is the optimal mode of delivery of these vaccines; and what are the cost and cost-effectiveness of vaccinating people highlighted in Nigeria's phase 2 vaccine rollout prioritized by the government, especially the inclusion of those aged between 18 and 49 years. The stakeholder mapping exercise highlighted the range of organizations and groups within Nigeria that could use the information from this HTA to guide decision-making. These stakeholders included both public/government, private and international organizations The dissemination plan developed included disseminating the full HTA results to key stakeholders; production of policy briefs; and presentation at different national and international conferences and peer-reviewed publications., Conclusions: HTA processes that involve stakeholder engagement will help ensure important policy questions are taken into account when designing any HTA including any underpinning evidence generation. Further guidance about stakeholder engagement throughout HTA is required, especially for those with low interest in vaccine procurement and use., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Globally, healthcare regulatory bodies require providers of academic programs to involve service users in the design and delivery of education, yet concrete and tested directions for operationalising this are lacking. Service users' involvement in education is often passive, ad-hoc and tokenistic, with limited input at the program development level., Aim: To explore the co-design processes and outcomes of a collaborative revision of an Australian post-registration mental health nursing curriculum., Method: Using qualitative case study design, the experiences and collaborative practices of five stakeholders (one mental health service user, two carers and two academics) co-designing a post-registration mental health nursing curriculum were explored., Results: Commonly identified barriers to meaningful involvement were overcome through planning and collaborative execution of the group's work. Participants reported a strong sense of successful collaboration in reviewing the curriculum, trusting relationships and mutual respect., Discussion: While it was possible to support and augment stakeholder knowledge in the context of post-registration education, co-design processes were ultimately bound by the university's relatively inflexible bureaucratic context., Implications for Practice: To ensure effective stakeholder collaboration beyond classroom teaching, mental health nurse academics must prepare service users for the role, explaining the language and practices of the tertiary health education and nursing context. As part of co-design processes, organisational mandates must be explored and negotiated, and mutual clarity regarding expectations and roles must be established. A Design Thinking approach can support meaningful engagement of stakeholders in curriculum development., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Few clinical trials include a detailed protocol for stakeholder engagement in the design and execution of the clinical trial. Deliver-EE is a pragmatic clinical trial to assess how different types of home-delivered meals can affect older adults' health and well-being. We present the protocol for stakeholder engagement in this national, multi-site trial and initial findings from our efforts., Methods: Twenty-nine participants were recruited to two stakeholder advisory panels. The "Lived Experience Perspectives" panel is defined as the clients, caregivers, and meal delivery drivers with first-hand knowledge and lived experiences with meal delivery. The "System Perspectives" panel is defined as representatives from the larger financial, clinical, regulatory, and operational environments in which meal delivery to homebound older adults operate. Together, these two groups holistically represent interested parties that coordinate the interdependent elements of meal delivery to homebound older adults in order to: 1) inform our understanding of what matters most to older adults, their families, and the larger health and social care systems; 2) provide strategies to overcome challenges conducting the study; 3) enhance dissemination and uptake of study findings; and 4) identify opportunities for future research., Results: Although stakeholder partners share a common goal of using home-delivered meals as a method to improve outcomes for homebound older adults, individuals have different goals for participating as advisors in this research., Conclusions: Understanding what individual stakeholders hope to gain from their participation is critical in designing an effective engagement protocol and critical for meaningful and rigorous stakeholder engagement in clinical trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None reported., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Since 2022, patients with five or more medicines are eligible for a medication review (MR) in a community pharmacy remunerated by the German health system. However, implementation has been slow, with few pharmacies providing MRs. Stakeholders' input is necessary to detail how implementation strategies can be executed effectively on a national level. Prior research identified "external facilitation" and "altering incentives" as crucial strategies to achieve implementation outcomes., Aim: To gather stakeholders' recommendations for, and obtain consensus on, mechanisms of change that allow implementation strategies to work in practice., Method: The consensus method used was the nominal group technique (NGT) with NGT-discussions held separately with pharmacy owners and pharmacy chambers employees. Votes were summed and the relative importance (rI) calculated, defined as (score achieved for a mechanism)/(maximum possible score) × 100. Content analysis provided context for the highest ranked mechanisms and allowed linking to implementation outcomes., Results: Four NGT-discussions were held in 2023 (n = 2 owners; n = 2 chamber employees) with a total of 17 participants. The overall highest ranked mechanisms were fit-for-purpose software (rI = 154.7) detailed process support (rI = 104.9) and an expert support line (rI = 77.7). These together with financial viability (rI = 40.0) were prioritised by both participant groups. Three mechanisms were favoured for both implementation strategies, namely software, process support and materials (rI = 34.3)., Conclusion: This study identified stakeholders' priorities for mechanisms of change to implement MRs in community pharmacies. Focusing efforts on the prioritised mechanisms is likely to significantly advance a national implementation plan for countries which are at an early implementation stage., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The need to understand the systems that support ethical health research has long been recognized, but there are limited descriptions of actual health research ethics (HRE) systems. Using participatory network mapping methods, we empirically defined Malaysia's HRE system. 13 Malaysian stakeholders identified 4 overarching and 25 specific HRE system functions and 35 actors internal and 3 external to the Malaysian HRE system responsible for those functions. Functions requiring the most attention were: advising on legislation related to HRE; optimizing research value to society; and defining standards for HRE oversight. Internal actors with the greatest potential for more influence were: the national network of research ethics committees; non-institution-based research ethics committees; and research participants. The World Health Organization, an external actor, had the largest untapped potential for influence overall. In summary, this stakeholder-driven process identified HRE system functions and actors that could be targeted to increase HRE system capacity., (© 2023 The Authors. Developing World Bioethics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Collaboration is gaining prominence in the priority setting of Health Policy And System Research (HPSR). However, its practice and challenges are not well explored in Ethiopia. Understanding the practice and barriers of collaborative Health Policy and System Research will help design approaches and platforms for setting inclusive and participatory policy and system-level health research topics. This paper explores the practice and barriers of collaborative HPSR-priority setting exercise in Ethiopia., Methods: This study investigates the practice and barriers of collaborative health policy and system research priority-setting exercises in Ethiopia. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, we conducted Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and an online self-administered survey with open-ended questionnaires to capture diverse perspectives from stakeholders involved in the research priority-setting process. Through conventional content analysis, we identified key contents related to current practices, challenges, and opportunities for enhancing collaboration in health policy and system research prioritization., Results: Our findings reveal a complex landscape characterized by varying levels of stakeholder engagement, institutional capacity constraints, and competing priorities within the health research ecosystem. Despite notable efforts to foster collaboration, stakeholders identified persistent challenges such as limited resources, institutional fragmentation, and inadequate coordination mechanisms as barriers to effective priority-setting processes. The implications of our research extend beyond academic discourse, with direct relevance to health policy and system research practice in Ethiopia. By shedding light on the dynamics of collaborative priority-setting exercises, our findings offer valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners seeking to enhance the effectiveness and inclusivity of health research prioritization processes. Addressing the identified barriers and leveraging existing strengths in the research ecosystem can contribute to more evidence-informed health policies and programs, ultimately improving health outcomes for Ethiopian populations., Conclusions: Most institutions do not apply health policy and system research-priority setting to conduct informed decision-making. The barriers explored were weak integration, lack of knowledge, system, and platforms for the priority setting of Health Policy and System Resreach. So, it is recommended to build skills of different actors in the Health Policy and System Research-priority setting exercise and design a system and platform to integrate different stakeholders for collaborative research topics priority setting., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are living longer with health-related disability associated with ageing, including complex conditions. However, health systems in Canada have not adapted to meet these comprehensive care needs., Methods: We convened three citizen panels and a national stakeholder dialogue. The panels were informed by a plain-language citizen brief that outlined data and evidence about the challenge/problem, elements of an approach for addressing it and implementation considerations. The national dialogue was informed by a more detailed version of the same brief that included a thematic analysis of the findings from the panels., Results: The 31 citizen panel participants emphasized the need for more prevention, testing and social supports, increased public education to address stigma and access to more timely data to inform system changes. The 21 system leaders emphasized the need to enhance person-centred care and for implementing learning and improvement across provinces, territories and Indigenous communities. Citizens and system leaders highlighted that policy actions need to acknowledge that HIV remains unique among conditions faced by Canadians., Conclusions: Action will require a national learning collaborative to support spread and scale of successful prevention, care and support initiatives. Such a collaborative should be grounded in a rapid-learning and improvement approach that is anchored on the needs, perspectives and aspirations of people living with HIV; driven by timely data and evidence; supported by appropriate decision supports and aligned governance, financial and delivery arrangements; and enabled with a culture of and competencies for rapid learning and improvement., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Despite a global decrease of 59% in under-five mortality rates from 1990 to 2021, child survival remains a pressing issue. This holds true for Bangladesh, as well. In response, the Government of Bangladesh introduced a standardised register for strengthening the inpatient management of newborns and sick children in 2021., Methods: We employed a comprehensive four-phase stakeholder engagement process to implement an inpatient register for newborns and sick children. The first stage included identifying and prioritising potential stakeholders at the national and district levels. We identified eight organisations involved in newborn and child health and selected 24 participants from various other sectors for workshops aimed at raising awareness about the register's introduction. These stakeholders also participated in the register's design, development strategies planning, and implementation phases. These phases were led by the 'National Newborn Health and IMCI programme' with support from various partners. A technical working group reviewed existing registers and helped prepare training materials. Feedback from each workshop was crucial in finalising the register., Results: The Government of Bangladesh has recognised the need for an indoor register for newborns and sick children, which was to be established in collaboration with development partners. This initiative can enhance the quality of care for sick children and increase service provider accountability. Due to its successful implementation, it will continue to be used in the Kushtia and Dinajpur districts, with plans for a nationwide scale-up. The Government has allocated funds in the next health sector programme for orientation and register printing. A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis of the stakeholder engagement process highlighted strengths such as a context-specific approach and collaborative engagement, as well as challenges such as time resource requirements., Conclusions: Implementing an inpatient register for newborns and sick children through stakeholder engagement can effectively improve child health care services. Aside from challenges such as resource intensiveness and stakeholder commitments, success depended on the organising authority's expertise in relationship building, budget allocation, time management, and workforce dedication. Therefore, strategic planning, staff recruitment, networking, and budgeting are crucial for successful stakeholder engagement and health care initiatives., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and disclose no relevant interests., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Background: Emergency obstetric and newborn care (EmONC) in Bangladesh focusses on maternal health, whereby it addresses childbirth and postpartum complications to ensure women's health and well-being. It was transitioned to a digital platform to overcome challenges with the paper-based EmONC register and we conducted implementation research to assess the outcome. Here we outline the stakeholder engagement process integral to the implementation research process., Methods: We adopted a four-step stakeholder engagement model based on the identification, sensitisation, involvement, and engagement of stakeholders. The approach was informed by previous experience, desk reviews, and expert consultations to ensure comprehensive engagement with stakeholders at multiple levels. Led by the Maternal Health Programme of the Government of Bangladesh, we involved high-power and high-interest stakeholders in developing a joint action plan for digitisation of the paper-based EmONC register. Finally, we demonstrated this digital EmONC register in real-life settings to stakeholders at different levels., Results: The successful demonstration process fostered government ownership and collaboration with multiple stakeholders, while laying the foundation for scalability and sustainability. Nevertheless, our experience highlighted that the stakeholder engagement process is context-driven, time-consuming, resource-intensive, iterative, and dynamic, and it requires involving stakeholders with varied expertise. Effective strategic planning, facilitation, and the allocation of sufficient time and resources are essential components for successful stakeholder engagement., Conclusions: Our experience demonstrates the potential of adopting the 'identification, sensitisation, involvement, and engagement' stakeholder engagement model. Success in implementing this model in diverse settings depends on leveraging knowledge gained during implementation, maintaining robust communication with stakeholders, and harnessing the patience and determination of the facilitating organisation., Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and disclose no relevant interests., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic affected stakeholder engagement in sustainability research projects in many ways. But which effects appear permanent today, after the pandemic ended?, Methods: To address this, we interviewed researchers and stakeholders and carried out a survey among European sustainability research projects in 2022., Results: We find that the pandemic years disrupted stakeholder-based research, also with lasting effects. The forced shift to online modes showed how digital engagement can bring benefits in terms of easier and more efficient stakeholder engagement, but also that important aspects are lost, particularly regarding intensity of collaboration and depth of insights. Whether to go online or stay offline depends largely on the research objective, which stakeholders to involve, and how well researchers and stakeholders already know each other. Most researchers and stakeholders want to continue online collaboration in the long term, especially those with positive online collaboration experiences from the pandemic years., Conclusions: The pandemic has a long-term impact on stakeholder engagement in research; online engagement cannot replace all benefit of previous in-person interactions with stakeholders, but it has led to digital innovations and expanded the engagement portfolio. Our research has provided qualitative insights into the impact of the pandemic on stakeholder engagement in various sustainability research projects and the implications for the long-term future that are relevant to researchers and funding agencies., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2024 Süsser D et al.)

Background: The national breast screening programme in the United Kingdom is under pressure due to workforce shortages and having been paused during the COVID-19 pandemic. Artificial intelligence has the potential to transform how healthcare is delivered by improving care processes and patient outcomes. Research on the clinical and organisational benefits of artificial intelligence is still at an early stage, and numerous concerns have been raised around its implications, including patient safety, acceptance, and accountability for decisions. Reforming the breast screening programme to include artificial intelligence is a complex endeavour because numerous stakeholders influence it. Therefore, a stakeholder analysis was conducted to identify relevant stakeholders, explore their views on the proposed reform (i.e., integrating artificial intelligence algorithms into the Scottish National Breast Screening Service for breast cancer detection) and develop strategies for managing 'important' stakeholders., Methods: A qualitative study (i.e., focus groups and interviews, March-November 2021) was conducted using the stakeholder analysis guide provided by the World Health Organisation and involving three Scottish health boards: NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, NHS Grampian and NHS Lothian. The objectives included: (A) Identify possible stakeholders (B) Explore stakeholders' perspectives and describe their characteristics (C) Prioritise stakeholders in terms of importance and (D) Develop strategies to manage 'important' stakeholders. Seven stakeholder characteristics were assessed: their knowledge of the targeted reform, position, interest, alliances, resources, power and leadership., Results: Thirty-two participants took part from 14 (out of 17 identified) sub-groups of stakeholders. While they were generally supportive of using artificial intelligence in breast screening programmes, some concerns were raised. Stakeholder knowledge, influence and interests in the reform varied. Key advantages mentioned include service efficiency, quicker results and reduced work pressure. Disadvantages included overdiagnosis or misdiagnosis of cancer, inequalities in detection and the self-learning capacity of the algorithms. Five strategies (with considerations suggested by stakeholders) were developed to maintain and improve the support of 'important' stakeholders., Conclusions: Health services worldwide face similar challenges of workforce issues to provide patient care. The findings of this study will help others to learn from Scottish experiences and provide guidance to conduct similar studies targeting healthcare reform., Study Registration: researchregistry6579, date of registration: 16/02/2021., (© 2024. The Author(s).)