[Swiss Research Agenda for Nursing (SRAN): the development of an agenda for clinical nursing research in Switzerland]

In many Anglo-Saxon and North European countries nursing research agendas have been developed to address priorities in nursing research in accordance with a nationally defined health policy. In Switzerland, due to lack of a nationwide governmental health policy, co-ordination of nursing research so far was scarce. The "Swiss Research Agenda for Nursing (SRAN)" project developed an agenda for clinical nursing research between 2005 and 2007. Based on literature reviews, expert panels and a national survey a project team formulated an agenda which passed a consensus conference. The agenda recommends aspects that should lead research and defines seven research priorities for nursing in Switzerland for the time between 2007 and 2017. Nursing research should prioritize to investigate 1) the effectiveness of nursing interventions; 2) the influences of service adaptations in a changing health care system; 3) the phenomena in patients requiring nursing care; 4) the influence of the work environment on the quality of nursing care; 5) the functioning of family and social systems; 6) varieties of life circumstances and their integration; and 7) the implementation of ethical principles in nursing. Written in German and French, the Swiss Research Agenda for Nursing for the first time formulates priorities for nursing research in Switzerland and can be used for strategic discussions. As a next step, the development of an action plan to enhance nursing research will take place in Switzerland.

Online Distance Education: Towards a Research Agenda

Online Distance Education: Towards a Research Agenda offers a systematic overview of the major issues, trends, and areas of priority in online distance education research. In each chapter, an international expert or team of experts provides an overview of one timely issue in online distance education, summarizing major research on the topic, discussing theoretical insights that guide the research, posing questions and directions for future research, and discussing the implications for distance education practice as a whole. Intended as a primary reference and guide for distance educators, researchers, and policymakers, Online Distance Education addresses aspects of distance education practice that have often been marginalized, including issues of cost and economics, concerns surrounding social justice, cultural bias, the need for faculty professional development, and the management and growth of learner communities. At once soundly empirical and thoughtfully reflective, yet also forward-looking and open to new approaches to online and distance teaching, this text is a solid resource for researchers in a rapidly expanding discipline.

Current State of Reporting Pain Outcomes in Cochrane Reviews of Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions and Considerations for an OMERACT Research Agenda.

OBJECTIVE To assess the current state of reporting of pain outcomes in Cochrane reviews on chronic musculoskeletal painful conditions and to elicit opinions of patients, healthcare practitioners, and methodologists on presenting pain outcomes to patients, clinicians, and policymakers. METHODS We identified all reviews in the Cochrane Library of chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions from Cochrane review groups (Back, Musculoskeletal, and Pain, Palliative, and Supportive Care) that contained a summary of findings (SoF) table. We extracted data on reported pain domains and instruments and conducted a survey and interviews on considerations for SoF tables (e.g., pain domains, presentation of results). RESULTS Fifty-seven SoF tables in 133 Cochrane reviews were eligible. SoF tables reported pain in 56/57, with all presenting results for pain intensity (20 different outcome instruments), pain interference in 8 SoF tables (5 different outcome instruments), and pain frequency in 1 multiple domain instrument. Other domains like pain quality or pain affect were not reported. From the survey and interviews [response rate 80% (36/45)], we derived 4 themes for a future research agenda: pain domains, considerations for assessing truth, discrimination, and feasibility; clinically important thresholds for responder analyses and presenting results; and establishing hierarchies of outcome instruments. CONCLUSION There is a lack of standardization in the domains of pain selected and the manner that pain outcomes are reported in SoF tables, hampering efforts to synthesize evidence. Future research should focus on the themes identified, building partnerships to achieve consensus and develop guidance on best practices for reporting pain outcomes.

MRD's approach: Ideally suited to support Future Earth research agenda in mountains

Both Future Earth and Mountain Research and Development (MRD) aim to support production and dissemination of knowledge for sustainable development. As shown in Future Earth’s Strategic Research Agenda 2014, the global research community has begun to acknowledge its societal role and the need for a new type of research in which scientists link disciplines and coproduce transformation knowledge with stakeholders. Future Earth has defined three research themes that conceptualize the issues to be dealt with at the same time as the way in which this should be done. In many ways, MRD’s policy has made the journal a forerunner of Future Earth’s stipulated “step-change in research”. Indeed, MRD’s section policies aim to support similar contents and ways of producing these forms of knowledge. MRD publishes “systems knowledge” in its MountainResearch section, “target knowledge” in its MountainAgenda section, and “transformation knowledge” in its MountainDevelopment section. Each of these sections has dedicated review criteria to assess and enhance the quality of the knowledge presented in the papers. In this poster, we provide examples from each of the three sections of what the knowledge types look like, how they are assessed, and how they contribute to the three Future Earth themes.

Improving the evidence base on public health assets—the way ahead: a proposed research agenda

The aim of this commentary is to set out a priority research agenda which will make more systematic the evidence base about why investing in a range of 'public health assets' is important for population health. It will rehearse in brief some of the issues that have been raised over the past few years as experience has grown about how to apply the idea to public health practice.