Background Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities suffer from disproportionately poorer health than the general population. This issue has been recently exemplified by the large numbers of infection rates and deaths caused by covid-19 in BAME populations. Future research has the potential to improve health outcomes for these groups. High quality research priority setting is crucial to effectively consider the needs of the most vulnerable groups of the population. Objective The purpose of this systematic review is to identify existing research priority studies conducted for BAME health and to determine the extent to which they followed good practice principles for research priority setting. Method Included studies were identified by searching Medline, Cinnahl, PsychINFO, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, as well as searches in grey literature. Search terms included “research priority setting”, “research prioritisation”, “research agenda”, “Black and minority ethnic”, “ethnic group”. Studies were included if they identified or elicited research priorities for BAME health and if they outlined a process of conducting a research prioritisation exercise. A checklist of Nine Common Themes of Good Practice in research priority setting was used as a methodological framework to evaluate the research priority processes of each study. Results Out of 1514 citations initially obtained, 17 studies were included in the final synthesis. Topic areas for their research prioritisation exercise included suicide prevention, knee surgery, mental health, preterm birth, and child obesity. Public and patient involvement was included in eleven studies. Methods of research prioritisation included workshops, Delphi techniques, surveys, focus groups and interviews. The quality of empirical evidence was diverse. None of the exercises followed all good practice principles as outlined in the checklist. Areas that were lacking in particular were: the lack of a comprehensive approach to guide the process; limited use of criteria to guide discussion around priorities; unequal or no representation from ethnic minorities, and poor evaluation of their own processes. Conclusions Research priority setting practices were found to mostly not follow good practice guidelines which aim to ensure rigour in priority setting activities and support the inclusion of BAME communities in establishing the research agenda. Research is unlikely to deliver useful findings that can support relevant research and positive change for BAME communities unless they fulfil areas of good practice such as inclusivity of key stakeholders’ input, planning for implementation of identified priorities, criteria for deciding on priorities, and evaluation of their processes in research priority setting.

Medical schools in the twenty first century, have undergone drastic changes in their teaching methodologies worldwide, more specifically in the teaching of anatomy. The main goal of any educational institution is the transfer of knowledge from educator to student in an effective manner. This review attempts to bring together the different teaching methodologies used in medical schools in this new era.Medical institutions have a wide variety of different approaches in teaching anatomy. Tradition dictates that cadaveric dissection and prosected specimens are the gold standard in providing medical students a solid foundation upon which they can build their knowledge and understanding. However, some medical schools use other educational tools, such as anatomical models, computer programs and medical imaging. Moreover, the recent introduction of non-conventional teaching techniques such as problem based learning, encourage cognitive thinking, teamwork and professionalism.Peer teaching is an innovative way of education, and it's success is thought to lie in cognitive congruence; having shared learning experiences and capabilities, cognitive congruence allows students to ask questions in confidence and make any clarifications, without fear of being judged. Other advantages include, enhanced teamwork and communication skills, for both the peer teacher and the students being taught.When viewing the whole spectrum of teaching tools and learning techniques, there are none that appear to be more superior to others, but rather that they should be used in conjunction with one another, in order to enhance learning. IntroductionThe adequate knowledge of anatomy is an essential aspect in becoming a competent physician, however the transfer of anatomical knowledge from educator to student in higher education has been in decline over a period of years (Turney, 2007). The most common pedagogy of theoretical anatomy is passive and ineffective (Schwerdt &Iqbal H MedEdPublish

Aim Obesity research priority setting, if conducted to a high standard, can help promote policy-relevant and efficient research. Therefore, there is a need to identify existing research priority setting studies conducted in the topic area of obesity and to determine the extent to which they followed good practice principles for research priority setting. Method Studies examining research priority setting in obesity were identified through searching the MEDLINE, PBSC, CINAHL, PsycINFO databases and the grey literature. The nine common themes of good practice in research priority setting were used as a methodological framework to evaluate the processes of the included studies. These were context, use of a comprehensive approach, inclusiveness, information gathering, planning for implementation, criteria, methods for deciding on priorities, evaluation and transparency. Results Thirteen articles reporting research prioritisation exercises conducted in different areas of obesity research were included. All studies reported engaging with various stakeholders such as policy makers, researchers and healthcare professionals. Public involvement was included in six studies. Methods of research prioritisation commonly included both Delphi and nominal group techniques and surveys. None of the 13 studies fulfilled all nine of the good practice criteria for research priority setting, with the most common limitations including not using a comprehensive approach and lack of inclusivity and evaluating on their processes. Conclusion There is a need for research priority setting studies in obesity to involve the public and to evaluate their exercises to ensure they are of high quality.