Set research priorities with structure and transparency.
Replace informal consensus and seniority-driven agendas with a structured, evidence-based process. Score candidate research questions independently, rank them transparently, and publish results that funders and policymakers can trust.
Multi-locale surveys
Role-based access
Transparent scoring
A peer-reviewed standard for research prioritisation
The CHNRI method was developed in the early 2000s by Professor Igor Rudan and colleagues at the University of Edinburgh, initially in close collaboration with WHO and UNICEF to set global child health research agendas.
The problem it solved was systemic: traditional priority-setting was dominated by the loudest voices and most senior figures in the room — the so-called HiPPO effect (Highest Paid Person's Opinion). Results were neither transparent nor reproducible, and junior researchers, field workers, and those closest to the problem were routinely sidelined.
CHNRI replaced this with a democratic, independently scored process: every expert votes separately, scores are averaged across the panel, and the full ranking is auditable. No group negotiation. No seniority weighting.
Ideometrics generalises this beyond health research. The scoring criteria, question pool, and expert panel can be configured for any domain — education policy, climate research, agricultural investment, innovation strategy, and more.
Key publications: Bulletin of the World Health Organization (2008); Croatian Medical Journal (2010); Journal of Global Health (2012–)Transparent by design
Every score is recorded. Rankings are fully auditable — funders and policymakers can see exactly how priorities were determined.
No seniority bias
Junior researchers, field workers, and senior academics all contribute equally. The method eliminates HiPPO-driven consensus.
Reproducible results
A structured scoring process means results are defensible, comparable across rounds, and can withstand external scrutiny.
Scales to hundreds of questions
Process far more candidate questions than any room-based meeting — simultaneously, asynchronously, and across time zones.
The CHNRI workflow, digitised
Four structured phases — from problem definition to published priorities — with full transparency at every step.
Define the problem space
Set the research scope, configure scoring criteria, and define stakeholder groups. Criteria can be tailored to any domain or funding context.
Gather candidate questions
Participants submit research investment options in their own language. Questions are reviewed, deduplicated, and prepared for independent scoring.
Independent expert scoring
Experts score each question against defined criteria independently — no group negotiation, no seniority bias. Scores are averaged across the full panel.
Publish ranked priorities
A composite priority score ranks each question. Results are fully transparent, auditable, and ready to share with funders and policymakers.
Proven across domains
The CHNRI method has been applied in exercises commissioned by WHO, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Wellcome Trust — and is now available for any research context.
Global health
Childhood pneumonia, diarrhoea, and neonatal survival research agendas (WHO/UNICEF)
Nutrition
Malnutrition and stunting research priorities for LMIC settings
Infectious disease
Antimicrobial resistance research investment priorities (WHO)
Mental health
Research priority-setting in low- and middle-income country contexts
Reproductive health
WHO/HRP programme research agendas
Any domain
The method's structure is domain-agnostic — Ideometrics adapts it to your field
Pricing
Start for free and upgrade as your research grows.
Free Get started£0 / mo | Paid Researchers£X / mo | Organisation Teams£X / mo | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Get started | Sign up | Sign up | |
| Exercises | |||
Exercises | 1 | 10 | Unlimited |
Live questions per exercise | 100 | Unlimited | Unlimited |
Multiple languages | |||
Add managers | |||
| AI | |||
AI question generation | |||
AI merge suggestions | |||
| Results & Analysis | |||
Downloadable results | |||
Post-scoring analysis | |||
Advanced post-scoring analysis | |||
| Communication & Export | |||
Email participants | |||
Paper generation | |||
Built for research teams and funders
From small academic groups to large multi-stakeholder exercises spanning dozens of countries and languages.
- Configurable scoring criteria per exercise
- Multi-locale surveys and exports
- Participant-friendly mobile survey UI
- Full score transparency and audit trail
Run your first exercise in minutes
Set up a priority-setting exercise, define your criteria, invite participants, and publish ranked results — no installation required.
Define scope and criteria
Invite participants to submit questions
Score independently — no group bias
Publish transparent, ranked priorities