Divergence of military and civilian trauma research priorities

Silver trauma research has several obstacles including complexity in determining research priorities and the lack of strong evidence to improve outcomes for injured older adults (especially evidence from the United Kingdom). Therefore, this study aims to identify, investigate, and prioritise the top research priorities to improve outcomes of injured older adults. The study will also highlight the current issues in trauma care for older people and contribute a collaborative and interdisciplinary work among experts who are interested in trauma care for older people.Methods and analysis: This study uses a three-step modified Delphi technique. The process consists of a divergent phase to elicit a broad range of views, a convergent ranking process in the second round (ranking the issues identified in round I), and a consensus meeting in the third round (determining to the top three issues of those met the predetermined consensus threshold in round II). Ethics and dissemination: The ethical approval of this study is currently underway with the University of Leicester, UK. The findings of this study will be published and presented in relevant conferences.

Download Full-text

TP9.1.4Use of a modified Delphi process to develop research priorities in Major Trauma

British Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1093/bjs/znab362.102 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽

Author(s):

Luke McElroy ◽

J McGillivray ◽

Michael Wilson

Keyword(s):

Online Survey ◽

Major Trauma ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Delphi Process ◽

Future Research ◽

High Quality Research ◽

Trauma Research ◽

Modified Delphi ◽

Research Questions

Abstract Aims Delphi methodology can be used to develop consensus opinion amongst a group of stakeholders. This can be used to prioritise clinically relevant, patient centred research questions to guide future funding allocations. The aim of our study was to identify key future research priorities pertaining to the management of major trauma in the UK. Methods A three-phased modified Delphi process was undertaken. Phase 1 involved the submission of research questions by members of the trauma community using an online survey (Phase 1). Phases 2 and 3 involved two consecutive rounds of prioritisation after questions were subdivided into 6 subcategories: Brain Injury, Rehabilitation, Trauma in Older People, Prehospital, Interventional, and Miscellaneous (Phases 2 and 3). Cut-off points were agreed by consensus among the steering subcommittees. This established a final prioritised list of research questions. Results 201 questions across all were submitted by 65 stakeholders in phase 1. After analysis and with consensus achieved, 186 questions were taken forward for prioritisation in phase 2 with 114 included in phase 3. 56 prioritised major trauma research questions across the 6 categories were identified with a clear focus on long-term patient outcomes. Conclusions Consensus from within the major trauma community has identified 56 key research questions across 6 categories. Dissemination of these questions to funding bodies to allow for the development of high-quality research is now required. There is a clear indication for targeted multi-centric multi-disciplinary research in major trauma.

Download Full-text

A consensus exercise identifying priorities for research into clinical effectiveness among children’s orthopaedic surgeons in the United Kingdom

The Bone & Joint Journal ◽

10.1302/0301-620x.100b5.bjj-2018-0051 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 100-B (5) ◽

pp. 680-684 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

D. C. Perry ◽

J. G. Wright ◽

S. Cooke ◽

A. Roposch ◽

M. S. Gaston ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

United Kingdom ◽

Orthopaedic Surgery ◽

Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Delphi Process ◽

British Society ◽

Orthopaedic Surgeons ◽

Trauma Research ◽

The United Kingdom

Aims High-quality clinical research in children’s orthopaedic surgery has lagged behind other surgical subspecialties. This study used a consensus-based approach to identify research priorities for clinical trials in children’s orthopaedics. Methods A modified Delphi technique was used, which involved an initial scoping survey, a two-round Delphi process and an expert panel formed of members of the British Society of Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery. The survey was conducted amongst orthopaedic surgeons treating children in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Results A total of 86 clinicians contributed to both rounds of the Delphi process, scoring priorities from one (low priority) to five (high priority). Elective topics were ranked higher than those relating to trauma, with the top ten elective research questions scoring higher than the top question for trauma. Ten elective, and five trauma research priorities were identified, with the three highest ranked questions relating to the treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (mean score 4.6/ 5), Perthes’ disease (4.5) and bone infection (4.5). Conclusion This consensus-based research agenda will guide surgeons, academics and funders to improve the evidence in children’s orthopaedic surgery and encourage the development of multicentre clinical trials. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:680–4.

Download Full-text

Patient-centered outcomes research and the injured patient: a summary of application

Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open ◽

10.1136/tsaco-2019-000422 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. e000422 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Laura N Godat ◽

Aaron R Jensen ◽

Deborah M Stein

Keyword(s):

Outcomes Research ◽

Healthcare Providers ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Injured Patient ◽

Early Career ◽

Thromboembolism Prophylaxis ◽

Patient Centered ◽

Trauma Research ◽

Injury Research ◽

Trauma Surgeons

As trauma surgeons, we focus on the immediate care and needs of the injured patient every day. Historically, trauma and injury research has focused on outcomes such as mortality, complications, and length of stay; and process metrics such as time to CT scan, resuscitation checklist frequencies, or venous thromboembolism prophylaxis rates. These outcomes are perceived by healthcare providers to be important, but patients likely have different perceptions of what outcomes are most important to measure and improve. True patient-centered outcomes research involves the healthcare providers, and the entire team of stakeholders including patients and the community. Understanding the process of stakeholder engagement and the barriers trauma researchers must overcome to effectively enter this field of research is important. This summary aims to inform the trauma research community on the basics of patient-centered outcomes research, priorities for funding from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, resources for collaboration around patient-centered outcomes research, and a unique career development and training opportunity for early career trauma surgeons to develop a skill set in patient-centered outcomes research.

Download Full-text

Autism Speaks Unveils New Research Priorities

ASHA Leader ◽

10.1044/leader.nib4.23032018.13 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 23 (3) ◽

pp. 13-13

Keyword(s):

Research Priorities ◽

New Research

Download Full-text

Current Postvention Research and Priorities for the Future

Crisis ◽

10.1027/0227-5910/a000459 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 38 (3) ◽

pp. 202-206 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Karl Andriessen ◽

Dolores Angela Castelli Dransart ◽

Julie Cerel ◽

Myfanwy Maple

Keyword(s):

Social Life ◽

Online Survey ◽

Research Priorities ◽

Future Research ◽

Physical And Mental Health ◽

Intercultural Collaboration ◽

The Social ◽

The Future ◽

Suicide Bereavement ◽

Ethical Approval

Abstract. Background: Suicide can have a lasting impact on the social life as well as the physical and mental health of the bereaved. Targeted research is needed to better understand the nature of suicide bereavement and the effectiveness of support. Aims: To take stock of ongoing studies, and to inquire about future research priorities regarding suicide bereavement and postvention. Method: In March 2015, an online survey was widely disseminated in the suicidology community. Results: The questionnaire was accessed 77 times, and 22 records were included in the analysis. The respondents provided valuable information regarding current research projects and recommendations for the future. Limitations: Bearing in mind the modest number of replies, all from respondents in Westernized countries, it is not known how representative the findings are. Conclusion: The survey generated three strategies for future postvention research: increase intercultural collaboration, increase theory-driven research, and build bonds between research and practice. Future surveys should include experiences with obtaining research grants and ethical approval for postvention studies.

Download Full-text