BACKGROUND Priority-setting partnerships between researchers and stakeholders (meaning consumers, health professionals and health decision-makers) may improve research relevance and value. The Cochrane Consumers and Communication Group (CCCG) publishes systematic reviews in 'health communication and participation', which includes concepts such as shared decision-making, patient-centred care and health literacy. We aimed to select and refine priority topics for systematic reviews in health communication and participation, and use these to identify five priority CCCG Cochrane Reviews. METHODS Twenty-eight participants (14 consumers, 14 health professionals/decision-makers) attended a 1-day workshop in Australia. Using large-group activities and voting, participants discussed, revised and then selected 12 priority topics from a list of 21 previously identified topics. In mixed small groups, participants refined these topics, exploring underlying problems, who they affect and potential solutions. Thematic analysis identified cross-cutting themes, in addition to key populations and potential interventions for future Cochrane Reviews. We mapped these against CCCG's existing review portfolio to identify five priority reviews. RESULTS Priority topics included poor understanding and implementation of patient-centred care by health services, the fact that health information can be a low priority for health professionals, communication and coordination breakdowns in health services, and inadequate consumer involvement in health service design. The four themes underpinning the topics were culture and organisational structures, health professional attitudes and assumptions, inconsistent experiences of care, and lack of shared understanding in the sector. Key populations for future reviews were described in terms of social health characteristics (e.g. people from indigenous or culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, elderly people, and people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage) more than individual health characteristics. Potential interventions included health professional education, interventions to change health service/health professional culture and attitudes, and health service policies and standards. The resulting five priority Cochrane Reviews identified were improving end-of-life care communication, patient/family involvement in patient safety, improving future doctors' communication skills, consumer engagement strategies, and promoting patient-centred care. CONCLUSIONS Stakeholders identified priority topics for systematic reviews associated with structural and cultural challenges underlying health communication and participation, and were concerned that issues of equity be addressed. Priority-setting with stakeholders presents opportunities and challenges for review producers.

中文翻译：

---

与消费者和其他利益相关者合作，选择、完善和确定健康沟通和参与方面的优先 Cochrane 评价。

背景研究人员和利益相关者（即消费者、卫生专业人员和卫生决策者）之间确定优先事项的伙伴关系可以提高研究的相关性和价值。Cochrane 消费者与沟通小组 (CCCG) 发表了“健康沟通和参与”方面的系统综述，其中包括共同决策、以患者为中心的护理和健康素养等概念。我们的目的是选择和完善健康沟通和参与系统评价的优先主题，并利用这些主题来确定五个优先的 CCCG Cochrane 评价。方法 28 名参与者（14 名消费者、14 名卫生专业人员/决策者）参加了在澳大利亚举行的为期 1 天的研讨会。通过大型团体活动和投票，参与者进行讨论、修改，然后从先前确定的 21 个主题列表中选择 12 个优先主题。在混合小组中，参与者完善了这些主题，探索潜在的问题、它们影响的对象以及潜在的解决方案。主题分析确定了跨领域主题，以及关键人群和未来 Cochrane 综述的潜在干预措施。我们将这些与 CCCG 现有的审查组合进行映射，以确定五项优先审查。结果 优先主题包括卫生服务机构对以患者为中心的护理的理解和实施不足、健康信息对于卫生专业人员来说可能不是优先考虑的事实、卫生服务中的沟通和协调故障以及消费者对卫生服务设计的参与不足。支撑这些主题的四个主题是文化和组织结构、卫生专业态度和假设、不一致的护理经验以及该部门缺乏共识。未来审查的关键人群是根据社会健康特征（例如来自土著或文化和语言背景不同的人、老年人和经历社会经济劣势的人）而不是个人健康特征来描述的。潜在的干预措施包括卫生专业教育、改变卫生服务/卫生专业文化和态度的干预措施以及卫生服务政策和标准。Cochrane 评价确定的五个优先事项是改善临终关怀沟通、患者/家属对患者安全的参与、提高未来医生的沟通技巧、消费者参与策略以及促进以患者为中心的护理。结论 利益相关者确定了与健康沟通和参与背后的结构和文化挑战相关的系统评价的优先主题，并担心公平问题得到解决。与利益相关者一起确定优先级为审稿人带来了机遇和挑战。