Optimising cohort data in Europe

Level of engagement

Approach

Who

Activities

Products

− Exploitation of project results − Further activities in research and development − Potential future collaborations

− Presentations at conferences − Meetings with stakeholders

One-way communication: SYNCHROS to stakeholder

− All stakeholder categories

Advocate

− PIs of cohort studies − Coordinators of harmonisation initiatives − Experts in methodological aspects cohort harmonisation

− Strategy brief on

Limited two-way engagement: SYNCHROS asks questions, stakeholders answer

− Stakeholder

harmonisation and integration methods

consultations

− Stakeholder survey

− Strategy brief on

Consult

practical, legal and ethical issues

− Experts in

ethical/legal aspects cohort harmonisation

− Scientific

− Strategy brief on

Limited two-way engagement: SYNCHROS asks feedback, stakeholders review Limited two-way engagement: SYNCHROS and stakeholders exchange ideas at an equal level

Advisory Board − Ethics Advisory Board − Key informants (methods, ethics/legal)

harmonisation and integration methods

− Interviews − Meetings

Review

− Strategy brief on

practical, legal and ethical issues

− Strategy brief on

harmonisation and integration methods

− Related H2020 projects

− Meetings

Exchange

− Strategy brief on

practical, legal and ethical issues

3.3.2. Evidence-informed policy-making In this phase of the project, the aim was to reach consensus about implementation. Pragmatic, moral and content reasons have been advocated for stakeholder involvement in this context (Van Tulder et al., 2004). Pragmatic because the views of heterogeneous stakeholders ensure a decision that is supported by a broad public, make stakeholders co responsible for decision-making, and prevent that decisions are rejected in a later stage;