ArticleHealth research policy and systems2026
A methodological framework for establishing regional disease-specific health research priorities (the RDHRP Framework).
Article in Health research policy and systems, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSetting regional disease-specific health research priorities is essential for guiding the development of the local health system and even the society through research. However, existing priority-setting approaches either rely heavily on opinions and lack transparent and reproducible procedures or demand intensive technical resources and are time-consuming. This study aimed to develop a structured, disease-specific, regionally adaptable methodological framework to address these gaps.
methodsA multidisciplinary working group with expertise in public health and clinical research methodology was established to develop the framework, with consultation from an expert panel in clinical medicine and health research administration. Through iterative discussions, the group defined five guiding principles: gap-oriented, evidence-based, disease-life-cycle-covered, aligned with clinical practice realities and reproducible and transparent. Based on these principles, the analytical steps of the framework were proposed, refined through expert review and pilot tested using gastric cancer and other diseases.
resultsA framework consisting of seven sequential steps and a generic health matrix template was developed and named the Regional Disease-Specific Health Research Priorities (RDHRP) Framework: (1) defining the research scope; (2) developing a disease-specific matrix for data search; (3) retrieving and processing indicator-based evidence; (4) synthesizing evidence and linking performance gaps to generate actionable research priorities; (5) drafting the preliminary report; (6) consulting experts and stakeholders; and (7) reporting, dissemination and monitoring. Applied to gastric cancer, the RDHRP Framework consistently identified system-level performance gaps between China and countries advanced in this area, explored underlying causes, reduced subjective topic selection and improved the alignment of proposed research questions with measurable health system needs. The case study produced a focused set of research priorities for China in gastric cancer research: community-based surveillance systems; scalable techniques for early identification, screening and diagnosis; Helicobacter pylori prevention and eradication strategies; and molecular classification, target discovery and innovative therapeutics development.
conclusionsThe RDHRP Framework provides a transparent, reproducible and adaptable approach for generating regional disease-specific health research priorities anchored in objective evidence and causal reasoning. Future work is warranted to evaluate its utility in diverse global settings, recognizing that resulting priorities may vary depending on disease, regional context and evolving evidence.
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.