Table 2.
Overall rank, evaluation criteria scores, research priority scores, and average expert agreement for top 15 research questions among all respondents
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research question |
Does accreditation or regulation of private clinical and non-clinical sources of care improve IMCI diagnosis, treatment, and appropriateness of testing and prescription? |
Can supportive supervision lead to improved quality of care in the private sector? |
What is the effectiveness of training private sector medicine vendors (ie, private drug shops, pharmacists, chemists, patent medicine vendors, etc.) to recognize, manage and/or refer sick young infants |
Can tools (eg, flipchart, decision tree, and other job aids) used by private providers/pharmacies/drug shops improve adherence to child health protocols (diarrhea and pneumonia management, malaria treatment, and nutritional screening and counseling? |
What are the key drivers of appropriate and inappropriate antimalarial and antibiotic prescription for children in private-for-profit sources of care by type of provider? |
How can the integration of routine child health data from private sector providers (clinical and non-clinical) into national health information systems be improved and sustained? |
What are the referral pathways in the private sector and what factors contribute to appropriate referrals to or from private sector providers? |
What models of supportive supervision for child health service delivery are most cost-effective in the private sector? |
What interventions are most effective in closing the gap between private provider knowledge and implementation of IMCI protocols? |
What factors contribute to private provider adherence to IMCI protocols? |
Can the iCCM approach be used in private non-clinical sources of care at scale to provide quality, appropriate, affordable, and accessible care? |
Can government medicine regulatory authorities improve the quality of antimalarial medicines and antibiotics distributed by private drug shops or their equivalent through the use of periodic audits with a portable device to assess drug quality? |
What can be done to reduce over-prescription of antibiotics when malaria rapid diagnostic testing results are negative and there are no other indications for antibiotic use? |
What factors contribute to the gap between private provider knowledge of IMCI protocols and their implementation of IMCI protocols? |
How well do private sector providers adhere to IMCI protocols? |
|
Evaluation criteria: | |||||||||||||||
| Answerability Question 1 Score: Single studies or small number of studies? |
77 |
81 |
79 |
81 |
79 |
74 |
76 |
74 |
72 |
80 |
73 |
80 |
75 |
77 |
78 |
| Answerability Question 2 Score: Measurable outcome indicators? |
85 |
86 |
86 |
87 |
82 |
79 |
78 |
80 |
80 |
83 |
79 |
83 |
76 |
81 |
84 |
| Research Feasibility Priority Score: Feasible to design and conduct study? |
81 |
85 |
81 |
85 |
84 |
80 |
81 |
78 |
80 |
83 |
79 |
82 |
77 |
79 |
86 |
| Sustainability and Equity Question 1 Score: Results in sustainable intervention/ strategy to implement within context of private sector? |
84 |
83 |
81 |
83 |
81 |
82 |
79 |
81 |
82 |
80 |
78 |
78 |
78 |
78 |
70 |
| Sustainability and Equity Question 2 Score: Results in scalable intervention/ strategy to implement within context of private sector? |
86 |
79 |
78 |
83 |
79 |
79 |
77 |
80 |
78 |
77 |
78 |
76 |
77 |
75 |
71 |
| Sustainability and Equity Question 3 Score: Results lead to intervention/strategy that strengthens partnerships between private sector and government? |
83 |
78 |
77 |
68 |
74 |
82 |
80 |
76 |
75 |
71 |
74 |
72 |
72 |
73 |
70 |
| Sustainability and Equity Question 4 Score: Results lead to more equitable outcomes? |
75 |
71 |
77 |
68 |
70 |
70 |
73 |
71 |
73 |
69 |
78 |
71 |
69 |
70 |
71 |
| Importance and Potential Impact Question 1 Score:Results fill an important knowledge gap? |
81 |
80 |
80 |
74 |
82 |
85 |
83 |
83 |
81 |
80 |
79 |
78 |
81 |
78 |
77 |
| Importance and Potential Impact Question 2 Score: Results inform future policy and practice? |
84 |
83 |
83 |
78 |
79 |
83 |
81 |
82 |
82 |
79 |
82 |
78 |
81 |
78 |
78 |
| Importance and Potential Impact Question 3 Score: Results relevant to at least one aspect of private sector across range of low- and middle-income countries? |
83 |
83 |
82 |
81 |
78 |
84 |
80 |
82 |
81 |
80 |
80 |
80 |
81 |
79 |
78 |
| Importance and Potential Impact Question 4 Score: Will the results from the research help to strengthen quality of care provided by private health providers |
85 |
87 |
81 |
86 |
84 |
73 |
80 |
80 |
82 |
84 |
80 |
80 |
82 |
80 |
77 |
| Research Priority Score (Interquartile Range) |
82.1 (80.8-85.0) |
81.5 (78.8-85.1) |
80.3 (77.8-81.7) |
79.6 (74.3-85.4) |
79.3 (78.2-82.1) |
79.3 (73.9-83.3) |
79.0 (77.1-81.2) |
78.9 (76.1-81.7) |
78.8 (75.0-81.7) |
78.6 (76.7-82.5) |
78.2 (77.9-80.0) |
78.0 (75.7-80.4) |
77.3 (75.3-81.3) |
77.1 (75.4-79.2) |
76.5 (70.8-78.4) |
| Average Expert Agreement | 52 | 47 | 40 | 51 | 48 | 47 | 43 | 49 | 53 | 48 | 43 | 51 | 47 | 47 | 42 |
IMCI – integrated management of childhood illness, iCCM − integrated community case management