ArticleBMJ mental health2026
Research priorities for mental health and circadian science: a priority setting partnership of individuals with lived experience, carers, clinicians and researchers.
Article in BMJ mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUndisturbed circadian rhythms of rest/activity are crucial to health and well-being. There is growing evidence to suggest that circadian rhythm disruptions are also associated with adverse mental health outcomes (and vice versa), but important questions about the relationship between circadian rhythms and mental health remain unanswered.
objectiveTo determine future priorities for research in the area of mental health and circadian rhythms, a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership exercise in collaboration with a steering group comprising individuals with lived experience, carers and clinicians was undertaken.
methodsAn initial survey among UK residents provided a set of 964 questions supplied by 247 respondents (227 lived experience, 44 carers (including 40 carers with lived experience), 41 clinicians (including 37 clinicians with lived experience)). Responses were processed into 171 summary questions by the steering group. Reviews of published research and existing clinical guidelines reduced this to 63 unanswered summary questions. A ranking survey of these 63 questions asked respondents to select their 10 most important research questions, from which the most highly ranked would be taken to the final stage. This was completed by 222 respondents (200 lived experience, 33 carers (including 29 carers with lived experience), 38 clinicians (including 30 clinicians with lived experience)).
findingsIn a final face-to-face workshop, 19 individuals, including individuals with lived experience, carers and clinicians, discussed and ranked a list of questions to produce a ranking of the top 25 research questions/priorities, with a particular focus on the Top 10. DISCUSSION: The final research questions are presented to inform researchers and funding bodies when setting future research priorities across the fields of mental health and circadian rhythms. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Addressing the priorities identified here should lead to greater understanding of the relationships between mental health and circadian rhythms and will have longer-term impacts on research, healthcare innovation and public health policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.