Introduction: Priority setting in the context of health research is important for developing countries as it assists policymakers and researchers in effectively and efficiently targeting research topics with the greatest benefit for public health. In the local setting, the Philippine National Unified Health Research Agenda (NUHRA) was formulated to prioritize health research topics that address the health needs of the population alongside the health sector’s goal for universal health care. This paper attempts to understand the alignment of the health research outputs by the Philippine Council for Health Research and Development (PCHRD) in addressing the priority health needs of the country. Methods: Review of secondary data and key informant interviews was done. Using a thematic analysis approach, we extracted secondary data from the 2006 to 2017 PCHRD Annual Reports to identify the completed PCHRD-funded health research projects. Excluded in scoping of secondary data were the zonal and other unpublished or not readily available online reports. Results: Results show that most research outputs address NUHRA priorities on health technology development and on the health needs on all life stages and triple burden of diseases under the Philippine Health Agenda. However, for research outputs to improve health outcomes, efforts must first be focused on health systems strengthening and the utilization of existing research information. Conclusion Gaps and challenges in the previous NUHRAs suggest that even as researches are aligned to the agenda, they do not necessarily address the health needs of the Philippines.
Support of Research ; Health Priorities

BACKGROUND: As one of the research councils under the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), health research priority setting has been the mandate of the Philippine Council for Health Research and Development (PCHRD) since its establishment in 1982. The development of the National Unified Health Research Agenda (NUHRA) convenes the major stakeholders for health in the country to establish the priorities for health research. The NUHRA aims to address the most urgent health issues in the country for the generation of solutions to the health concerns of the country.

OBJECTIVES AND METHOD: Through document review, this paper describes the approaches and lessons learned in research priority setting since the establishment of the Philippine National Health Research System.

RESULTS: The Philippines has employed a bottoms-up, top-down, and a combination of both approaches to develop its health research agenda.

CONCLUSION: The health research agenda-setting must consider evolving funding sources, its link to production of researches with high probability of knowledge translation to health technology innovation, and policy formulation. Measuring the impact of the NUHRA to the health systems and health situation of the country is a difficult assessment, but the gradual change in healthcare technology utilization and evidence-informed policies towards health equity can be a subjective measurement of the NUHRA's success.

Background: Understanding and addressing social determinants of health through evidence-based action is a strategy that has been advocated by the World Health Organization as part of its “Health for All” strategy in 1978 and “Health in All Policies“ framework in 2013. It has then been recommended that the research agenda-setting process should be informed by socio-economic development plans with the specific aim of gathering data on social, economic, and cultural conditions that affect health. Objective: This paper reviewed the PDP 2011-2016, PDP 2017-2022, MDGs, and SDGs and identified common directions with the NUHRA 2011-2016 and 2017-2022. Methods: A content analysis of the three identified priorities of the NUHRA vis-a-vis the PDP 2011-2016, the PDP 2017-2022, the MDGs, and the SDGs was done in order to identify harmonization of the priorities of the NUHRAs targets and indicators with those of the other plans and agendas. A gap analysis across all topics was done to identify links and gaps. Results: The results established the common ground between health research priorities and international and national plans. Comparing the number of direct relationships between the NUHRAs, PDPs, MDGs, and SDGs, it was noted that there were more direct links between NUHRA 2017-2022, PDP 2017-2022, and the SDGs compared to NUHRA 2011-2016, PDP 2011-2016, and MDGs. The direct links were mostly found in 1) maternal, newborn and child health, 2) health systems, 3) communicable diseases, 4) water, sanitation, and hygiene, 5) environment, and 6) infrastructure development. Conclusion The NUHRAs may serve as pathways to achieve the goals stipulated in other socio-economic development plans. The relationships of these to health are complex, nonlinear and often the effects manifest after a long period of time, and as such require rigorous research.
Social Determinants of Health

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe long-term visions for health research in the Philippines. Ambisyon Natin 2040, an overarching vision for a dynamic country by the year 2040, is its main inspiration as this enables innovation and sustainable development.

METHODS: The health research profile conceptual framework developed by Tugwell et al., (2006) was utilized to structure the articulation of these visions. Review of related literature, reports, and documents and in-depth interviews with key players in health research were conducted.

RESULTS: In view of economic and technological developments in the country, it is expected that in 2040, health research priorities shall be more trans-disciplinary and more advanced. Research on health regulation and ethics will continue to be of importance. A more enabling environment for health research is also envisioned, since majority of research funding is expected to come from government, in addition to more research-friendly laws. More innovative platforms will be utilized to disseminate research results. The increasing international exposure and impact of academic work in the Philippines is also envisaged.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Health research in the Philippines has been benefitted by a lot of gains and advances in the past years. Thus, to create an enabling health research system in the Philippines by 2040, focusing on innovations in health research, increased number of funding sources, and crafting of better policies on health research should be pursued. Sustaining these gains and advancing health research in our country entail collective effort from different stakeholders, both public and private.

OBJECTIVES: Stakeholders and stakeholder engagement in agenda setting are not well documented despite its increased recognition. This paper aimed to describe stakeholder engagement in the agenda setting. Specifically, it aimed to (1) describe the process of stakeholder engagement in the development of the NUHRA 2017-2022; (2) describe characteristics of stakeholders involved; and (3) identify lessons learned during the engagement.

METHODS: Documents pertinent to the agenda setting process, which included profile of participants and feedback on the consultation process were reviewed and analyzed. Key informant interviews were also conducted among selected PCHRD officials and members of the Philippine National Health Research System - Research Agenda Committee. Stakeholder mapping was conducted prior to the engagement to identify potential stakeholders. Consultations were conducted in each region involving different stakeholders. Stakeholders in the consultation process were national government agencies, local government units, academe, public and private health facilities, and non-government organizations (NGOs).

RESULTS: The stakeholder with the highest representation was the national government (n=110), while the lowest were public and private health facilities (n=14 each). Interactive discussion of stakeholders with diverse background, is the top item that went well during the consultation and should be retained in the future, and; brainstorming session and presentation were identified item that needs improvement.

CONCLUSION: A diverse and well-represented set of stakeholders is important in an agenda setting to appropriately identify priorities and to improve uptake of the agenda. Stakeholder engagement, however, should not be limited to agenda setting, collaborative work must be sustained in all aspects of the research cycle.