Tools
ToolsOduola, Sheri, Morrissey, Sol, Zile, Amy, Balaam, Jay, Morgan, Craig, Das-Munshi, Jayati, Broomfield, Niall, Holmes, Joni, Khadjesari, Zarnie, Parretti, Helen and Sanderson, Kristy (2026) Setting Mental Health Research Priorities in Norfolk and Suffolk: A Stakeholder Consultation.
![[thumbnail of rba08-Khadjesari_etal_Setting_m]](https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/style/images/fileicons/application_msword.png) |
Microsoft Word (rba08-Khadjesari_etal_Setting_m)
- Draft Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (450kB) |
Abstract
Introduction: Mental health problems disproportionately affect marginalised communities rural, coastal, and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities. This is especially true for Norfolk and Suffolk, UK, where anxiety and depression are above national averages, suicide is the leading cause of death among those with mental ill-health, and access to care is poor. These communities are also underserved by research, leaving significant needs unmet. Aims: This project aimed to establish mental health research priorities informed by the views of key stakeholders in Norfolk and Suffolk, including people with lived experience of mental ill-health, members of the public, clinicians, charities, and policymakers. Methods and analysis: We conducted a mixed-methods research-priority-setting exercise involving an online survey (n=156, of whom 64.7% had lived experience) and two in-person prioritisation workshops with people with lived experience (n=10) and health and social care professionals (n=15). Following Delphi principles and guided by the James Lind Alliance approach, the survey asked participants to rate research priority statements across eight mental-health domains using a 3-point Likert scale (0 = low, 1 = moderate, 2 = high). Statements rated as high priority by ≥50% of the respondents were shortlisted for the workshops. During the two-day workshops, participants discussed the shortlisted statements in small groups before voting individually on those they considered most important. Scores were calculated separately for each workshop, then combined to produce a final ranked list of the Top 10 research priorities. Ethics: The University of East Anglia’s Faculty of Medicine and Health Research Ethics Committee granted ethical approval (reference: ETH2324-2542). Results: Of the 70 original priority statements, 40 met the threshold for inclusion in the prioritisation workshops. Participants in the two prioritisation workshops identified and agreed on the final Top 10 priorities, spanning youth mental health, physical–mental health integration, access to care, impacts of rural and coastal living, social and health inequalities, health promotion and prevention, and big-data solutions. Conclusions: Stakeholders in this study identified local mental health needs and highlighted areas where research is urgently required. These priorities will inform future studies, support policymaking, and guide resource allocation to improve mental healthcare and reduce inequalities in rural and coastal communities.
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |