Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to define priority areas for research on chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis in Canada through the use of a consensus method.
METHODS: A modified Delphi method was conducted, consisting of two online surveys and an in-person meeting. Participants included people working in bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) across Canada, including clinicians, policy-makers, public health practitioners, and researchers.
RESULTS: Consensus was achieved regarding the most important priority topics in bacterial STI research in Canada, within five general priority areas: the epidemiology of bacterial STIs, screening, partner notification and contact tracing, antimicrobial resistance, and identification of best practices for the prevention and control of bacterial STIs.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this consensus process can be used to inform research efforts, which could contribute to more effective control of bacterial STIs in Canada.
Key words: Sexually transmitted diseases, chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, consensus
Résumé
OBJECTIFS: Nous avons tenté de définir des axes prioritaires d’intervention pour la recherche sur la chlamydiose, la gonorrhée et la syphilis au Canada par la méthode du consensus.
MÉTHODE: Nous avons employé une méthode Delphi modifiée, avec deux sondages en ligne et une réunion en personne. Les participants (cliniciens, responsables des politiques, praticiens de la santé publique, chercheurs) travaillaient au Canada dans le domaine des infections transmissibles sexuellement (ITS) d’origine bactérienne.
RÉSULTATS: Les participants se sont entendus sur les thèmes prioritaires les plus importants de la recherche sur les ITS bactériennes au Canada, à l’intérieur de cinq axes prioritaires d’intervention généraux: l’épidémiologie des ITS bactériennes; le dépistage; la notification des partenaires et le retraçage des contacts; la résistance antimicrobienne; et l’identification des pratiques exemplaires en matière de prévention et de lutte contre les ITS bactériennes.
CONCLUSIONS: Les constatations de ce processus consensuel peuvent servir à éclairer les efforts de recherche, lesquels pourraient contribuer à un contrôle plus efficace des ITS bactériennes au Canada.
Mots clés: maladies sexuellement transmissibles, chlamydia, gonorrhée, syphilis, consensus
Footnotes
Acknowledgements: Funding for this project was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, grant 228262. Fiona Kouyoumdjian received salary support from a Fellowship from the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
References
- 1.Low N, Broutet N, Adu-Sarkodie Y, Barton P, Hossain M, Hawkes S. Global control of sexually transmitted infections. Lancet. 2006;368(9551):2001–16. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69482-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Wong T, Singh A, Mann J, Hansen L, McMahon S. Gender differences in bacterial STIs in Canada. BMC Women’s Health. 2004;4(Suppl1):S26. doi: 10.1186/1472-6874-4-S1-S26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Public Health Agency of Canada. Reported cases and rates of chlamydia by age group and sex, 1991 to 2009. Ottawa, ON: PHAC; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Public Health Agency of Canada. Reported cases and rates of gonorrhea by age group and sex, 1980 to 2009. Ottawa: PHAC; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Public Health Agency of Canada. Reported cases and rates of infectious syphilis by age group and sex, 1993 to 2009. Ottawa: PHAC; 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Hasson F, Kenney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs. 2000;32(4):1008–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Wathen CN, MacGregor JC, Hammerton J, Coben JH, Herrman H, Stewart DE, et al. Priorities for research in child maltreatment, intimate partner violence and resilience to violence exposures: Results of an international Delphi consensus development process. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:684. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-684. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Weeks LC, Seely D, Balneaves LG, Boon HS, Leis A, Oneschuk D, et al. Canadian integrative oncology research priorities: Results of a consensus-building process. Current Oncol. 2013;20(4):e289–99. doi: 10.3747/co.20.1378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Sivananthan SN, Chambers LW. A method for identifying research priorities for health systems research on health and aging. Healthcare Management Forum. 2013;26(1):33–36. doi: 10.1016/j.hcmf.2012.08.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Haukoos JS, Mehta SD, Harvey L, Calderon Y, Rothman RE. Research priorities for human immunodeficiency virus and sexually transmitted infections surveillance, screening, and intervention in emergency departments: Consensus-based recommendations. Acad Emerg Med. 2009;16(11):1096–102. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2009.00546.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Aral SO, Over M, Manhart L, Holmes KK. Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries. 2nd edition. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2006. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.World Health Organization. Global Strategy for the Prevention and Control of Sexually Transmitted Infections: 2006–2015. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press; 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 13.World Health Organization. Sexually Transmitted Diseases Diagnostics Initiative. 2012. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Althaus CL, Heijne JC, Herzog SA, Roellin A, Low N. Individual and population level effects of partner notification for Chlamydia trachomatis. PLOS ONE. 2012;7(12):e51438. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051438. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hottes TS, Farrell J, Bondyra M, Haag D, Shoveller J, Gilbert M. Internet-based HIV and sexually transmitted infection testing in British Columbia, Canada: Opinions and expectations of prospective clients. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(2):e41. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1948. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases. Partner Notification Project. Available at: http://www.nccid.ca/partner-notification (Accessed January 14, 2012).
- 17.Lusti-Narasimhan M, Ndowa F, Pires SS. Importance of sexually transmitted infections in funding for HIV within proposals to the Global Fund. Sex Transm Infect. 2011;87(Suppl2):ii19–22. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2011-050183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook RH. Consensus methods: Characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health. 1984;74(9):979–83. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.74.9.979. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Cole ZD, Donohoe HM, Stellefson ML. Internet-based Delphi research: Case based discussion. Environ Manage. 2013;51(3):511–23. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-0005-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Black N, Murphy M, Lamping D, McKee M, Sanderson C, Askham J, et al. Consensus development methods: A review of best practice in creating clinical guidelines. J Health Serv Res Pol. 1999;4(4):236–48. doi: 10.1177/135581969900400410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Cwikel JG, Lazer T, Press F, Lazer S. Sexually transmissible infections among female sex workers: An international review with an emphasis on hard-to-access populations. Sexual Health. 2008;5(1):9–16. doi: 10.1071/SH07024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.BMJ Open. 2013.