ABSTRACT
Setting research priorities in the cycle of research management is critical. The limitation in human and financial resources and policy changes are the most significant reasons necessitating research priorities to be set. Research prioritization can materialize and be effective at different levels ranging from macro and national to educational and research levels. To this end, IBTO Research and Education Deputy by this study has embarked on a serious measure in organizing and orienting investigations in IBTO.First the necessity of the implementation of the project was elaborated in the Research Council and priorities were set. Then, different procedures were conducted based on the guidelines of COHRED [Council on Health Research for Development] and by use of priority-setting instruments applied in research institutes. At the end, the results were reviewed by the Research Council so that the final priorities were approved of. In the present study, out of the whole number of forms distributed for priority-setting, blood centers, headquarter managers and consultants, and the faculty members had respectively a share of 64.28%, 33.33%, and 25.92% in responses. At the process of title collection, more responses were received as compared with the priority setting process. Finally, 99 research titles in 16 domains were approved of as final priorities by the IBTO Research Center. Priority-setting was conducted through the method recommended by COHRED for the first time in IBTO. In spite of the participation of the out-of-organization beneficiary, research centers, and scientific associations, the highest rate of participation goes to intra-organizational groups. Approved priorities can be implemented by a call for research, the creation of an evaluation system for recommended projects, and survey of approved projects. Thus, the most use can be made of financial and human resources for priority-setting