Developing consensus measures for global programs: Lessons from the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases Hypertension research program

On behalf of the GACD Hypertension Research Programme

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The imperative to improve global health has prompted transnational research partnerships to investigate common health issues on a larger scale. The Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases (GACD) is an alliance of national research funding agencies. To enhance research funded by GACD members, this study aimed to standardise data collection methods across the 15 GACD hypertension research teams and evaluate the uptake of these standardised measurements. Furthermore we describe concerns and difficulties associated with the data harmonisation process highlighted and debated during annual meetings of the GACD funded investigators. With these concerns and issues in mind, a working group comprising representatives from the 15 studies iteratively identified and proposed a set of common measures for inclusion in each of the teams' data collection plans. One year later all teams were asked which consensus measures had been implemented. Results: Important issues were identified during the data harmonisation process relating to data ownership, sharing methodologies and ethical concerns. Measures were assessed across eight domains; demographic; dietary; clinical and anthropometric; medical history; hypertension knowledge; physical activity; behavioural (smoking and alcohol); and biochemical domains. Identifying validated measures relevant across a variety of settings presented some difficulties. The resulting GACD hypertension data dictionary comprises 67 consensus measures. Of the 14 responding teams, only two teams were including more than 50 consensus variables, five teams were including between 25 and 50 consensus variables and four teams were including between 6 and 24 consensus variables, one team did not provide details of the variables collected and two teams did not include any of the consensus variables as the project had already commenced or the measures were not relevant to their study. Conclusions: Deriving consensus measures across diverse research projects and contexts was challenging. The major barrier to their implementation was related to the time taken to develop and present these measures. Inclusion of consensus measures into future funding announcements would facilitate researchers integrating these measures within application protocols. We suggest that adoption of consensus measures developed here, across the field of hypertension, would help advance the science in this area, allowing for more comparable data sets and generalizable inferences.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number17
JournalGlobalization and Health
Volume13
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 15 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Consensus
Chronic Disease
Hypertension
Research
Research Personnel
Information Dissemination
Ownership
Smoking
Alcohols
Demography
Health

Keywords

  • Consensus Measures
  • Hypertension
  • Implementation
  • Implementation Context
  • Low and middle income countries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Developing consensus measures for global programs : Lessons from the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases Hypertension research program. / On behalf of the GACD Hypertension Research Programme.

In: Globalization and Health, Vol. 13, No. 1, 17, 15.03.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6b88ffaa46ce44b8b0480e214c06d1ef,
title = "Developing consensus measures for global programs: Lessons from the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases Hypertension research program",
abstract = "Background: The imperative to improve global health has prompted transnational research partnerships to investigate common health issues on a larger scale. The Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases (GACD) is an alliance of national research funding agencies. To enhance research funded by GACD members, this study aimed to standardise data collection methods across the 15 GACD hypertension research teams and evaluate the uptake of these standardised measurements. Furthermore we describe concerns and difficulties associated with the data harmonisation process highlighted and debated during annual meetings of the GACD funded investigators. With these concerns and issues in mind, a working group comprising representatives from the 15 studies iteratively identified and proposed a set of common measures for inclusion in each of the teams' data collection plans. One year later all teams were asked which consensus measures had been implemented. Results: Important issues were identified during the data harmonisation process relating to data ownership, sharing methodologies and ethical concerns. Measures were assessed across eight domains; demographic; dietary; clinical and anthropometric; medical history; hypertension knowledge; physical activity; behavioural (smoking and alcohol); and biochemical domains. Identifying validated measures relevant across a variety of settings presented some difficulties. The resulting GACD hypertension data dictionary comprises 67 consensus measures. Of the 14 responding teams, only two teams were including more than 50 consensus variables, five teams were including between 25 and 50 consensus variables and four teams were including between 6 and 24 consensus variables, one team did not provide details of the variables collected and two teams did not include any of the consensus variables as the project had already commenced or the measures were not relevant to their study. Conclusions: Deriving consensus measures across diverse research projects and contexts was challenging. The major barrier to their implementation was related to the time taken to develop and present these measures. Inclusion of consensus measures into future funding announcements would facilitate researchers integrating these measures within application protocols. We suggest that adoption of consensus measures developed here, across the field of hypertension, would help advance the science in this area, allowing for more comparable data sets and generalizable inferences.",
keywords = "Consensus Measures, Hypertension, Implementation, Implementation Context, Low and middle income countries",
author = "{On behalf of the GACD Hypertension Research Programme} and Riddell, {Michaela A.} and Nancy Edwards and Thompson, {Simon R.} and Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz and Devarsetty Praveen and Claire Johnson and Kengne, {Andre P.} and Peter Liu and Tara McCready and Eleanor Ng and Robby Nieuwlaat and Bruce Ovbiagele and Mayowa Owolabi and David Peiris and Thrift, {Amanda G.} and Sheldon Tobe and Khalid Yusoff and {de Villiers}, Anniza and Feng He and Graham MacGregor and Stephen Jan and Bruce Neal and Clara Chow and Rohina Joshi and Stephen MacMahon and Anushka Patel and Anthony Rodgers and Ruth Webster and Keat, {Ng Kien} and Amir Attaran and Edward Mills and Katherine Muldoon and Sanni Yaya and Amber Featherstone and Barbara Mukasa and Jamie Forrest and Robert Kalyesubula and Julius Kamwesiga and Lopez, {Paul Camacho} and Tayari, {Jean Claude} and Patricio Lopez and Casas, {Juan Lopez} and Martin McKee and Zainal, {Ariffin Omar} and Salim Yusuf and Norman Campbell and Kajiru Kilonzo and Marion Marr and Karen Yeates and Thomas Inui",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1186/s12992-017-0242-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
journal = "Globalization and Health",
issn = "1744-8603",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Developing consensus measures for global programs

T2 - Lessons from the Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases Hypertension research program

AU - On behalf of the GACD Hypertension Research Programme

AU - Riddell, Michaela A.

AU - Edwards, Nancy

AU - Thompson, Simon R.

AU - Bernabe-Ortiz, Antonio

AU - Praveen, Devarsetty

AU - Johnson, Claire

AU - Kengne, Andre P.

AU - Liu, Peter

AU - McCready, Tara

AU - Ng, Eleanor

AU - Nieuwlaat, Robby

AU - Ovbiagele, Bruce

AU - Owolabi, Mayowa

AU - Peiris, David

AU - Thrift, Amanda G.

AU - Tobe, Sheldon

AU - Yusoff, Khalid

AU - de Villiers, Anniza

AU - He, Feng

AU - MacGregor, Graham

AU - Jan, Stephen

AU - Neal, Bruce

AU - Chow, Clara

AU - Joshi, Rohina

AU - MacMahon, Stephen

AU - Patel, Anushka

AU - Rodgers, Anthony

AU - Webster, Ruth

AU - Keat, Ng Kien

AU - Attaran, Amir

AU - Mills, Edward

AU - Muldoon, Katherine

AU - Yaya, Sanni

AU - Featherstone, Amber

AU - Mukasa, Barbara

AU - Forrest, Jamie

AU - Kalyesubula, Robert

AU - Kamwesiga, Julius

AU - Lopez, Paul Camacho

AU - Tayari, Jean Claude

AU - Lopez, Patricio

AU - Casas, Juan Lopez

AU - McKee, Martin

AU - Zainal, Ariffin Omar

AU - Yusuf, Salim

AU - Campbell, Norman

AU - Kilonzo, Kajiru

AU - Marr, Marion

AU - Yeates, Karen

AU - Inui, Thomas

PY - 2017/3/15

Y1 - 2017/3/15

N2 - Background: The imperative to improve global health has prompted transnational research partnerships to investigate common health issues on a larger scale. The Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases (GACD) is an alliance of national research funding agencies. To enhance research funded by GACD members, this study aimed to standardise data collection methods across the 15 GACD hypertension research teams and evaluate the uptake of these standardised measurements. Furthermore we describe concerns and difficulties associated with the data harmonisation process highlighted and debated during annual meetings of the GACD funded investigators. With these concerns and issues in mind, a working group comprising representatives from the 15 studies iteratively identified and proposed a set of common measures for inclusion in each of the teams' data collection plans. One year later all teams were asked which consensus measures had been implemented. Results: Important issues were identified during the data harmonisation process relating to data ownership, sharing methodologies and ethical concerns. Measures were assessed across eight domains; demographic; dietary; clinical and anthropometric; medical history; hypertension knowledge; physical activity; behavioural (smoking and alcohol); and biochemical domains. Identifying validated measures relevant across a variety of settings presented some difficulties. The resulting GACD hypertension data dictionary comprises 67 consensus measures. Of the 14 responding teams, only two teams were including more than 50 consensus variables, five teams were including between 25 and 50 consensus variables and four teams were including between 6 and 24 consensus variables, one team did not provide details of the variables collected and two teams did not include any of the consensus variables as the project had already commenced or the measures were not relevant to their study. Conclusions: Deriving consensus measures across diverse research projects and contexts was challenging. The major barrier to their implementation was related to the time taken to develop and present these measures. Inclusion of consensus measures into future funding announcements would facilitate researchers integrating these measures within application protocols. We suggest that adoption of consensus measures developed here, across the field of hypertension, would help advance the science in this area, allowing for more comparable data sets and generalizable inferences.

AB - Background: The imperative to improve global health has prompted transnational research partnerships to investigate common health issues on a larger scale. The Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases (GACD) is an alliance of national research funding agencies. To enhance research funded by GACD members, this study aimed to standardise data collection methods across the 15 GACD hypertension research teams and evaluate the uptake of these standardised measurements. Furthermore we describe concerns and difficulties associated with the data harmonisation process highlighted and debated during annual meetings of the GACD funded investigators. With these concerns and issues in mind, a working group comprising representatives from the 15 studies iteratively identified and proposed a set of common measures for inclusion in each of the teams' data collection plans. One year later all teams were asked which consensus measures had been implemented. Results: Important issues were identified during the data harmonisation process relating to data ownership, sharing methodologies and ethical concerns. Measures were assessed across eight domains; demographic; dietary; clinical and anthropometric; medical history; hypertension knowledge; physical activity; behavioural (smoking and alcohol); and biochemical domains. Identifying validated measures relevant across a variety of settings presented some difficulties. The resulting GACD hypertension data dictionary comprises 67 consensus measures. Of the 14 responding teams, only two teams were including more than 50 consensus variables, five teams were including between 25 and 50 consensus variables and four teams were including between 6 and 24 consensus variables, one team did not provide details of the variables collected and two teams did not include any of the consensus variables as the project had already commenced or the measures were not relevant to their study. Conclusions: Deriving consensus measures across diverse research projects and contexts was challenging. The major barrier to their implementation was related to the time taken to develop and present these measures. Inclusion of consensus measures into future funding announcements would facilitate researchers integrating these measures within application protocols. We suggest that adoption of consensus measures developed here, across the field of hypertension, would help advance the science in this area, allowing for more comparable data sets and generalizable inferences.

KW - Consensus Measures

KW - Hypertension

KW - Implementation

KW - Implementation Context

KW - Low and middle income countries

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85015260273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85015260273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12992-017-0242-8

DO - 10.1186/s12992-017-0242-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 28298233

AN - SCOPUS:85015260273

VL - 13

JO - Globalization and Health

JF - Globalization and Health

SN - 1744-8603

IS - 1

M1 - 17

ER -