Issue link: https://hi.iaq.net/i/670243
© Royal College of Physicians 2016 103 Methodology Background Sir Richard Thompson, immediate past president of the Royal College of Physicians (RCP), initially contacted Professor Stephen Holgate to discuss the health effects of climate change; this later developed into air pollution, with climate change as a sub-area of this, recognising new research that could inform the field. A working party, chaired by Professor Holgate, was set up to look at the topic of air pollution and its effect on health across the lifecourse, including looking at the effects in utero. Administration The working party was led by the RCP. It was agreed that the report should be jointly owned by the RCP and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH), owing to the aspects of child health that are covered, as well as issues relating to later life. • The working party was administered through the RCP Membership Support and Global Engagement Department. • Production of the report was managed by the RCP Strategy, Communications and Policy Department. Meetings The working party met as follows. • One planning meeting to set out the aims and objectives of the report. This allowed planning prior to the invitation of potential members of the working party, and was felt to be a good approach to ensure that the report's scope was available to share with potential members. • Six meetings of the working party, which were each 3 hours long (plus an evidence-giving session of an additional 2 hours). These meetings were formally led by the chair of the working party, with an agenda that covered the minutes of the previous meeting, the breakdown of the report, and discussions around chapter development and recommendations. The project initiation document was assessed at each meeting and updated accordingly. This was considered to be a robust approach to ensure that all relevant areas were covered adequately and discussed. Members of RCP staff were invited to provide input on policy, recommendation setting and good publication practice. • Sub-meetings were set up on an ad hoc basis, with attendance of the chair and vice chair for discussions around policy aspects, key recommendations and additional evidence. Additional meetings were held to ensure that policy aspects of the report could be discussed in detail with the RCP, and recommendations could be finalised. The six meetings were well attended by working party members, with most members attending each meeting either in person or via teleconferencing. There was representation from both the RCP and the RCPCH at all meetings. Working party members / chapter authors were reminded at each meeting to disclose any potential new conflicts of interest. If members sent their apologies, written emails and updates were circulated.