 Good afternoon. My name is Dorothy Chepkiri. I'm currently a research intern for Vyopida. I'm going to present the work that we are doing, which is a scoping review on research prioritization for high-consequence pathogens. And I'm doing this with our new team, who's here with us. Prioritization for health research is important for effective resource allocations. And from the literature, we see multiple research priorities that have been reported, examples are the green card model. And however, there's limited discussion on prioritization methodologies in the context of preparedness and response for high-consequence pathogens. So when we started our work, we did a scope on what could be the high-consequence pathogens. And we currently are using at least where we put together the depth of priority list, together with lists from other regional organizations. So the objectives of our work is to provide an overview of methodologies employed in priority setting, to describe assessment methodologies for the priorities that have been set, and to identify any standards that could be used as recommendations for effective research prioritization. So since this is a scoping review, we are using the AXI and normality framework, with adaptations from the JBI, and we're using the key terms prioritization, response methodologies, and the synonyms, plus the high-consequence pathogens that meet the letter. Our work, we have two independent reviewers, which, who are doing the reviews on RIA, based on the work that we did, hits that we heard from the librarian. On our initial site, we found about 4,000 articles, and we're going on to touch the other great literature. So we do hope that this work is going to provide an understanding of existing methodologies, provide evidence on standards that could be recommended, and ultimately influence our funders and other stakeholders in designing optimal prioritization activities for effective resource allocation. Thank you.