Proposed Consensus-Based Canadian Integrative Oncology Research Priorities

Objectives: An increasing number of integrative oncology programs are being established across Canada that offer a combination of complementary and conventional medical treatments in a shift towards whole-person cancer care. It was our objective to identify consensus-based research priorities within a coherent research agenda to guide Canadian integrative oncology practice and policy moving forward.Methods: Members of the Integrative Canadian Oncology Research Initiative and the Ottawa Integrative Cancer Centre organized a 2-day consensus workshop, which was preceded by a Delphi survey and stakeholder interviews.Results: Eighty-one participants took part in Round 1 of the Delphi survey, 52 in Round 2 (66.2%) and 45 (86.5%) in Round 3. Nineteen invited stakeholders participated in the 2-day workshop held in Ottawa, Canada. Five inter-related priority research areas emerged as a foundation for a Canadian research agenda: Effectiveness; Safety; Resource and Health Services Utilization; Knowledge Translation; and Developing Integrative Oncology Models. Research is needed within each priority area from a range of different perspectives (e.g., patient, practitioner, health system) and that reflects a continuum of integration from the addition of a single complementary intervention within conventional cancer care to systemic change. Participants brainstormed strategic directions to implement the developing research agenda and identified related opportunities within Canada. A voting process helped to identify working groups to pursue strategic directions within the interest and expertise of meeting participants.Conclusion: The identified research priorities reflect the needs and perspectives of a spectrum of integrative oncology stakeholders. Ongoing stakeholder consultation, including engagement from new stakeholders, is needed to ensure appropriate uptake and implementation of the Canadian research agenda.

Download Full-text

THE IMPLICIT CANADIAN RESEARCH AGENDA FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION: 2019

Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) ◽

10.24908/pceea.vi0.14849 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Renato Bezerra Rodrigues ◽

Jillian Seniuk Cicek ◽

Marcia Friesen

Keyword(s):

Engineering Education ◽

Research Agenda ◽

Teaching And Learning ◽

Main Research ◽

Research Areas ◽

Philosophy Of Engineering ◽

Education Community ◽

Organizational Engineering ◽

The One ◽

Canadian Research

Given the growth of the engineering education community in Canada, we argue that a research agendathat reflects our own identity and interests is needed. To start this conversation, we conducted a content analysis of the 2019 CEEA-ACEG conference proceedings to investigate the implicit Canadian research agenda for engineering education. We analyzed five characteristics: publications’ stream, level of collaboration, authors’ affiliations and, more importantly, their research topicsand areas. We found that the Canadian EER community is very practice-oriented, collaborative and that mostuniversities were represented at the conference. Also, seven main research areas were identified: Assessment,Teaching and Learning, Students, Faculty, Organizational, Engineering Education Discipline, and Philosophy of Engineering. Among these areas, Teaching and Learning is, by far, the one that received the most attention.

Download Full-text

Canadian integrative oncology research priorities: results of a consensus-building process

Current Oncology ◽

10.3747/co.20.1378 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 20 (4) ◽

pp. 289 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

L.C. Weeks ◽

D. Seely ◽

L.G. Balneaves ◽

H.S. Boon ◽

A. Leis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Priorities ◽

Consensus Building ◽

Integrative Oncology ◽

Oncology Research ◽

Building Process

Download Full-text

Swaziland National Health Research Agenda: The Formulation Process

International Archives of Medicine ◽

10.3823/2518 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Joses Muthuri Kirigia ◽

Martin O. Ota ◽

Babazile Shongwe

Keyword(s):

National Health ◽

Health Research ◽

Research Agenda ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Communicable Diseases ◽

Research Gaps ◽

Draft Report ◽

Main Research ◽

Research Areas ◽

Research Themes

Background: The objectives of this article are to describe the process followed in development of the Swaziland’s national health research agenda (NHRA); and to provide an overview of the health research priorities that emerged from that process.Discussion: Swaziland followed a fourteen step process to develop it’s NHRA, namely: search and review of the existing health research priority setting guidelines; situation analysis included review of Swaziland’s socio-economic indicators; identification of research stakeholders; identification of the preliminary main broad research themes; development of questionnaire on ranking of main research themes; workshops with each of the eight stakeholders; ranking of major health themes and identification of sub-themes; identification of research gaps under each sub-theme and main research areas; scoring of research areas; research areas were grouped by sub-themes and ranked; collating research areas ranked as number one in each sub-theme; providing content to the agenda; preparation of the zero NHRA draft report; preparation of the first NHRA draft report taking into account critical inputs from stakeholders; and stakeholder’s final validation of the NHRA draft report. The paper provides an overview of communicable diseases, non-communicable diseases, sexual and reproductive health, injuries and health system research gaps under four categories of research: situation (burden and determinants); improvement of existing interventions; effectiveness of interventions; and feasibility of developing new capacities (tools and products).Conclusion: The National Health Research Department, with the support of the National Health Research Review Board, will be responsible for dissemination, preparation of rolling annual action plans to secure government funds for implementation of NHRA, promoting adherence among stakeholders, establishing a registry of R4H, establishing a knowledge translation platform, building of public-private-partnerships for research, mobilization of external resources, coordination and monitoring of the implementation of the NHRA. KeywordsSwaziland, National Health Research Agenda, Health Research Priorities, Research Stakeholders, Research Gaps

Download Full-text

A multidisciplinary Delphi study: Setting pediatric oncology research priorities

Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing ◽

10.1053/jpon.2002.0190072a ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 19 (2) ◽

pp. 72-73

Author(s):

Jami S. Gattuso ◽

Elizabeth A. Gilger ◽

Georgette Chammas ◽

Samuel Maceri ◽

Nancy K. West ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Pediatric Oncology ◽

Delphi Study ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Oncology Research ◽

Study Setting

Download Full-text

Integrative Oncology: Research and Practice

Advances in Integrative Medicine ◽

10.1016/j.aimed.2013.08.017 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 65-66

Author(s):

Avni Sali

Keyword(s):

Integrative Oncology ◽

Research And Practice ◽

Oncology Research

Download Full-text

Clinical Oncology Practice 2015: Preparing for the Future

American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book ◽

10.14694/edbook_am.2015.35.e622 ◽

2015 ◽

pp. e622-e627 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Michael P. Kosty ◽

Anupama Kurup Acheson ◽

Eric D. Tetzlaff

Keyword(s):

Clinical Oncology ◽

Nurse Practitioners ◽

Cancer Care ◽

Medical Knowledge ◽

Physician Assistants ◽

The United States ◽

Practice Model ◽

American Society ◽

Oncology Practice

The clinical practice of oncology has become increasingly complex. An explosion of medical knowledge, increased demands on provider time, and involved patients have changed the way many oncologists practice. What was an acceptable practice model in the past may now be relatively inefficient. This review covers three areas that address these changes. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) National Oncology Census defines who the U.S. oncology community is, and their perceptions of how practice patterns may be changing. The National Cancer Institute (NCI)-ASCO Teams in Cancer Care Project explores how best to employ team science to improve the efficiency and quality of cancer care in the United States. Finally, how physician assistants (PAs) and nurse practitioners (NPs) might be best integrated into team-based care in oncology and the barriers to integration are reviewed.

Download Full-text