Research Priorities for Children With Food Allergy: A UK James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership
14 affiliations
- 1University of Bristol Bristol UK
- 2University of Edinburgh Edinburgh Scotland
- 3University of Southampton, David Hide Asthma and Allergy Centre, NIHR Southampton BRC, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Southampton UK
- 4Sheffield Hallam University Sheffield UK
- 5Castle Partnership Norwich UK
- 6University of Southampton Southampton UK
- 7Allcare Pharmacy Dublin Ireland
- 8University Hospitals Bristol, NHS Foundation Trust Bristol UK
- 9Eczema Outreach Support Linlithgow Scotland
- 10Anaphylaxis Farnborough UK
- 11Allergy Frimley UK
- 12Natasha Allergy Research Foundation London UK
- 13PSP steering group public member University of Bristol Bristol UK
- 14James Lind Alliance Southampton UK
Abstract
Introduction: Using the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, we established a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) to identify the most important unanswered research questions in childhood food allergy. This approach places those directly affected, those with food allergy, their parents/carers, and healthcare professionals at the centre of the process.
Methods: A multidisciplinary steering group (n = 19 people) oversaw the PSP. Research uncertainties were collected through a UK‐wide online survey distributed to children, young people and adults with food allergy, their parents/carers, and healthcare professionals working in food allergy. A focus group was conducted with seven children aged 8–11 years with food allergy to ensure inclusion of their perspectives. Submitted questions were reviewed, combined into summary questions, and checked against existing evidence to confirm that they represented genuine uncertainties. An interim prioritisation survey was used to rank questions, with equal weighting given to each stakeholder group. A final facilitated workshop used a nominal group technique to agree on the top 10 research priorities.
Results: In total, 916 respondents submitted 2563 questions. After removing out‐of‐scope and already answered questions, an interim prioritisation survey was completed by 1087 participants. The final workshop involved 29 participants, including young people (n = 3), young adults (n = 4), parents (n = 7) and multidisciplinary healthcare professionals (n = 15), who agreed on the top 10 questions. These cover prevention, early diagnosis, treatment, causes, eating out, safety in care settings, impact, emergency treatment, and awareness of food allergy. There was strong consensus from the final workshop across all attendees that prevention should be the number one priority.
Conclusion: Using a rigorous, transparent, and person‐centred approach, we have identified the most important research priorities in childhood food allergy. They highlight the depth and breadth of research required to improve the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and broader impacts of food allergy on children, families, and carers who live with this condition.
Related
- Immersion 360, a european patient-partnered research project aimed at developing communication skills in paediatrics and raising awareness of interprofessional collaboration practice in partnership.
- Health prevention research in France: Increasing investment is a priority, rethinking targets is equally crucial
- Scientific preparedness for the future of mycology: mapping knowledge gaps to guide priority setting and emerging research opportunities
- Small-statured tomato plants for automating greenhouse production: opportunities, constraints, and research priorities
- Methodological challenges, solution pathways, and future priorities in Mendelian randomization research: a bibliometric and content analysis
BibTeX
@article{parslow2026research,
title = {{Research Priorities for Children With Food Allergy: A UK James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership}},
author = {Roxanne M. Parslow and Farhad Shokraneh and Sara J. Brown and Mary Feeney and Graham Roberts and Hora Soltani and Joanne Walsh and Amy Dobson and Emma Vaughan and Deborah Marriage and Suzi Holland and Mary Kelly and Holly Shaw and Alicia Kennedy and Eden Byrne and Liliana Jackson and Gail Jackson and Lauren Gluyas and Jonathan Gower and Alyson Huntley and Matthew J. Ridd},
journal = {Clinical and Experimental Allergy},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.1111/cea.70377},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70377},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Research Priorities for Children With Food Allergy: A UK James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership
AU - Roxanne M. Parslow
AU - Farhad Shokraneh
AU - Sara J. Brown
AU - Mary Feeney
AU - Graham Roberts
AU - Hora Soltani
AU - Joanne Walsh
AU - Amy Dobson
AU - Emma Vaughan
AU - Deborah Marriage
AU - Suzi Holland
AU - Mary Kelly
AU - Holly Shaw
AU - Alicia Kennedy
AU - Eden Byrne
AU - Liliana Jackson
AU - Gail Jackson
AU - Lauren Gluyas
AU - Jonathan Gower
AU - Alyson Huntley
AU - Matthew J. Ridd
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/05
JO - Clinical and Experimental Allergy
DO - 10.1111/cea.70377
UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70377
AB - Introduction: Using the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, we established a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) to identify the most important unanswered research questions in childhood food allergy. This approach places those directly affected, those with food allergy, their parents/carers, and healthcare professionals at the centre of the process. Methods: A multidisciplinary steering group (n = 19 people) oversaw the PSP. Research uncertainties were collected through a UK‐wide online survey distributed to children, young people and adults with food allergy, their parents/carers, and healthcare professionals working in food allergy. A focus group was conducted with seven children aged 8–11 years with food allergy to ensure inclusion of their perspectives. Submitted questions were reviewed, combined into summary questions, and checked against existing evidence to confirm that they represented genuine uncertainties. An interim prioritisation survey was used to rank questions, with equal weighting given to each stakeholder group. A final facilitated workshop used a nominal group technique to agree on the top 10 research priorities. Results: In total, 916 respondents submitted 2563 questions. After removing out‐of‐scope and already answered questions, an interim prioritisation survey was completed by 1087 participants. The final workshop involved 29 participants, including young people (n = 3), young adults (n = 4), parents (n = 7) and multidisciplinary healthcare professionals (n = 15), who agreed on the top 10 questions. These cover prevention, early diagnosis, treatment, causes, eating out, safety in care settings, impact, emergency treatment, and awareness of food allergy. There was strong consensus from the final workshop across all attendees that prevention should be the number one priority. Conclusion: Using a rigorous, transparent, and person‐centred approach, we have identified the most important research priorities in childhood food allergy. They highlight the depth and breadth of research required to improve the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and broader impacts of food allergy on children, families, and carers who live with this condition.
SN - 0954-7894
SN - 1365-2222
ER -