Priority setting for Cochrane Review Groups

[Extract] The number of clinical questions is almost infinite, whereas the resources to answer them are limited. Accordingly, Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) must establish priorities. To do so, we need to understand the information needs of patients, their clinicians, and perhaps health administrators responsible for prioritizing health resources. In the past, this was undertaken implicitly, mostly based on pragmatic considerations (Can the proposed team achieve the review without gargantuan input from the CRG? Is there any evidence for the question? Is the question addressing currently used, or at least contemplated, clinical practice?), but we now know that clinicians and clinical researchers make errors in assuming what is important to know for patients. For example, priority setting of an organization setting research outcome measures in rheumatology (OMERACT, https://omeract.org/) had to be completely rejigged after patients with rheumatoid disease were explicitly asked for their research outcome priorities (tiredness being reported by patients as much more important than pain and function, their previously assumed priorities). This is true for many other clinical areas.