Background: Understanding and effectively managing self-harm and suicide require collaborative research between stakeholders focused on shared priorities. Aims: We aimed to develop a consensus about suicide and self-harm research priorities in the North West of England using the Delphi method. Method: Items for the Delphi survey were generated through group discussions at a workshop with 88 stakeholders and subsequent thematic analysis of key themes. A total of 44 participants who were experts-by-experience, researchers, and clinicians based within health services including third-sector organizations completed the Delphi survey. Results: A three-round survey reached consensus on 55 research priority items identifying key priorities in each of the following groups: offenders, children and young people, self-harm in community settings, and crisis care in the community. Limitations: The pool of delegates at the workshop and subsequent self-selection into the Delphi may have introduced bias into the study. Conclusion: The current paper highlights specific actionable priorities were identified in four areas that can be used to inform research efforts and future policy and practice, based on shared areas of perceived importance and concern. Future work is needed to confirm the significance of these priority areas, including the use of evidence synthesis approaches to ascertain the extent to which these priorities have already been investigated and where gaps in understanding remain.

中文翻译：

---

确定英格兰西北部的自杀和自残研究重点。

背景：理解和有效管理自残和自杀需要利益相关者之间的合作研究，重点放在共同的优先事项上。目的：我们旨在使用德尔菲法就英格兰西北部的自杀和自残研究重点达成共识。方法：德尔福调查的项目是通过与 88 位利益相关者在研讨会上的小组讨论以及随后对关键主题的专题分析产生的。共有 44 名参与者是经验丰富的专家、研究人员和医疗服务机构（包括第三方机构）的临床医生，他们完成了德尔福调查。结果：三轮调查就 55 个研究重点项目达成共识，确定以下每个群体的关键重点：罪犯、儿童和青少年、社区环境中的自残、和社区的危机护理。局限性：研讨会上的代表池和随后的 Delphi 自选可能会在研究中引入偏见。结论：目前的论文强调了在四个领域中确定的具体可行的优先事项，这些领域可用于为研究工作和未来的政策和实践提供信息，基于感知到的重要性和关注的共同领域。未来的工作需要确认这些优先领域的重要性，包括使用证据综合方法来确定这些优先领域已经被调查的程度以及在哪些方面仍然存在理解差距。目前的论文强调了在四个领域中确定的具体可行的优先事项，这些领域可用于为研究工作以及未来的政策和实践提供信息，基于感知到的重要性和关注的共同领域。未来的工作需要确认这些优先领域的重要性，包括使用证据综合方法来确定这些优先领域已经被调查的程度以及在哪些方面仍然存在理解差距。目前的论文强调了在四个领域中确定的具体可行的优先事项，这些领域可用于为研究工作以及未来的政策和实践提供信息，基于感知到的重要性和关注的共同领域。未来的工作需要确认这些优先领域的重要性，包括使用证据综合方法来确定这些优先领域已经被调查的程度以及在哪些方面仍然存在理解差距。