Identifying research priorities with children, youth, and families: A scoping review.
Shokoufeh Modanloo, Quinn Correll, Rhonda Correll and 7 others
PMID 36647285WHAT IT FOUND
Children and families set priorities like pain management, mental health access, and hospital-to-home transitions.
Yet they were outnumbered by professionals in 28 studies. Clinicians should verify if current care plans address these family-identified needs, not just clinical metrics.
Key findings
01Two-thirds of participants in priority-setting studies were healthcare professionals or researchers, not patients or families.
02Top research priorities identified included improving pain management, mental health screening, and support during transitions from hospital to home.
03Families prioritized psychosocial health and non-pharmacological interventions more highly than health professionals did.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review included only studies published in English. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries (UK, USA, Australia), limiting generalizability to other settings. No data on race or ethnicity of participants was collected, potentially missing perspectives from marginalized groups. Scoping reviews do not assess the quality of included studies, so the rigor of the original priority-setting processes varies.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that clinical priorities align with family priorities. The review shows families often prioritize psychosocial health and non-pharmacological support over clinical treatments, and they were significantly underrepresented in the studies that set these agendas.