Inherited retinal diseases (IRDs) are a broad range of diseases associated with abnormalities/degeneration of retinal cells. We aimed to identify the top 10 Australian research priorities for IRDs to ultimately facilitate more meaningful and potentially cost-effective research.

We conducted a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership that involved two Australian-wide surveys and online workshops.

Australia-wide.

Individuals aged 16 years or older were eligible to participate if they had an IRD, were caregivers of an individual with an IRD or were health professionals providing care to this community.

In Survey 1, we gathered participants’ unanswered questions about IRDs. We grouped these into summary questions and undertook a literature review to verify if they were truly unanswered (ie, evidence uncertainties). In Survey 2, participants voted for the uncertainties that they considered a priority. Top-ranked uncertainties progressed for discussion and final prioritisation in two workshops.

In Survey 1, we collected 223 questions from 69 participants. We grouped these into 42 summary questions and confirmed 41 as evidence uncertainties. In Survey 2, 151 participants voted, with the 16 uncertainties progressing to final prioritisation. The top 10 priorities, set by the 24 workshop participants, represented (1) treatment/cure; (2) symptoms and disease progression; (3) psychosocial well-being and (4) health service delivery. The #1 priority was for treatment to prevent, slow down or stop vision loss, followed by the #2 priority to address the psychological impact of having an IRD.

The top 10 research priorities highlight the need for IRD research that takes a whole-person, systems approach. Collaborations to progress priorities will accelerate the translation of research into real-world benefits.

To estimate type 2 diabetes incidence trends by sex and socioeconomic position (SEP) and evaluate trends in SEP-related inequalities in incidence.

Ecological study using ambulatory claims data and regression-based modelling.

All 401 counties in Germany, covering the entire country.

All individuals with statutory health insurance (~85% of the population). Incident cases of type 2 diabetes were identified annually from 2014 to 2019 using the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th revision codes.

Incident type 2 diabetes at the county level, adjusted for age and modelled using a mixed negative binomial regression. SEP was measured using the German Index of Socioeconomic Deprivation, and a random intercept accounted for county-level heterogeneity.

The incidence of type 2 diabetes decreased between 2014 and 2017 and plateaued thereafter. Trends were similar between sexes and deprivation levels. The greatest difference was observed between high and low deprivation, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.20 (95% CI: 1.14 to 1.27) among men and 1.21 (95% CI: 1.14 to 1.27) among women in 2014.

There was a positive trend in the decline in age-adjusted type 2 diabetes incidence between 2014 and 2019. However, social inequality persisted with deprived groups at higher risk of type 2 diabetes. The level of inequality was comparable between men and women. Continued monitoring is essential to assess whether these short-term trends persist over time.