Table 3.

Brief explanation of the James Lind Alliance Method [9]

Overall process	Focuses on bringing patients, carers and health professionals in order to identify treatment uncertainties which will become research questions. The method uses a mixture of data gathering, quantitative and qualitative analysis to create research priorities in areas of treatment uncertainty.
How are participants identified?	Participants are identified through Priority Setting Partnerships which brings patients, carers and clinicians equally together and agree through consensus priorities.
How are research ideas identified	Treatment uncertainties are defined as no up to date, reliable systematic reviews addressing treatment uncertainty, or systematic review that shows such uncertainty exists. Step 1: Recommendations by PSPs, or through looking at existing literature, creates a list of uncertainties. Step 2: These are then verified through systematic reviews of databases to verify they are research gaps using Cochrane, DARE, NICE, Sign. An uncertainty is deemed genuine when a reported confidence interval in a systematic review does not cross the line of effect or line of unity. A virtual interim priority ranking, and a final priority setting workshop takes place to agree upon 10 prioritised uncertainties through consensus building.
Scoring criteria	No clear criteria are identified with which to use.
Scoring options	Ranked AND Qualitative consensus
Advantages	– Takes into account underrepresented groups – Applicable to small scale prioritisation (eg, hospital) – Mixture of methods
Disadvantages	– Time consuming to identify and verify treatment uncertainties – Selection of criteria not clear – Not suitable for global level, nor specific disease domains – Very clinically orientated – Disproportionate mix of participants may skew information base