Chronic illnesses affect the everyday life and school life of young people, their ability to cope with developmental tasks and their social participation in a variety of ways (Keller et al., 2025; Wicks et al., 2019; Willke & Walser, 2025). Specific (educational) challenges arise particularly in adolescence, a phase of life in which being chronically ill must be subjectively interpreted, managed and integrated into one's own identity (Pfeiffer & Pinquart, 2013). This applies in particular to chronic illnesses with an episodic course, such as epilepsy or migraine, which are characterised by longer symptom-free phases and at the same time acute, unpredictable episodes of illness with sometimes considerable impairments and loss of control (Hoß & Maier, 2013). For those affected, this ambivalence between being ill and being perceived from the outside as (conditionally) healthy (Sobczak & Radinger, 2022) as well as the unpredictability of the course (Mishel, 1990) results in a lasting ambiguity with regard to self-perception and perception by others, divergent role perceptions and expectations.

The cumulative doctoral project addresses this ambivalence and ambiguity from a pedagogical perspective and examines its significance for educational processes, school participation and adolescent development. On the basis of literature-based reviews and qualitative, empirical studies, subjective perspectives of adolescents with chronic-episodic illnesses and pedagogically relevant patterns of interpretation and action by teachers are analysed. The aim is to develop theoretically sound and practice-relevant implications for a reflective, inclusive pedagogy in the case of illness.

To the person page

Submitted to the Faculty Human and Health Sciences, University of Bremen
For the Degree of Dr Public Health
Examiners: Prof. Dr Hajo Zeeb & Prof. Dr Benjamin Schüz

Defence: 07th of March 2025 (magna cum laude)

This dissertation developed and evaluated a structured, transparent, and resource-efficient approach to research priority setting (RPS) in public health. The overarching aim was to establish a priority-setting framework that enables the meaningful involvement of a wide variety of stakeholders despite often existing resource constraints.

Recognising that public health is a multifaceted field spanning multiple sectors and stakeholder groups, the work addresses key limitations of existing RPS approaches, particularly their limited inclusivity, transparency, and replicability. Across four interconnected articles, the dissertation introduces, implements, and refines a multi-stage RPS approach based on a modified Delphi process and stakeholder-defined multi-criteria assessment. The approach was empirically piloted in Switzerland to prioritize topics for systematic reviews and in Germany to prioritise broader substantive and methodological public health research topics.

These studies demonstrated that large and diverse stakeholder groups-including researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and patient representatives-can be successfully engaged with high participation rates. The findings also highlight meaningful differences in priorities across stakeholder groups and illustrate how the use of multiple assessment criteria provides a more nuanced and holistic understanding of public health research needs.

Building on these empirical insights, the dissertation culminates in the development of a transparent, reproducible, and adaptable toolkit for research priority setting, particularly tailored to systematic reviews. This toolkit facilitates high stakeholder involvement through easy-to-implement online surveys and minimises resource demands, while maintaining methodological rigor. Overall, the dissertation contributes a robust and inclusive framework for guiding prioritisation processes, which can also be applied in other fields and disciplines other than public health.

https://kxp.k10plus.de/DB=2.1/SET=1/TTL=1/SHW?FRST=1/PRS=HOL

To the person page