Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMcElroy, L
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, L
dc.contributor.authorBattle, C
dc.contributor.authorLaidlaw, L
dc.contributor.authorTeager, A
dc.contributor.authorde Bernard, L
dc.contributor.authorMcGillivray, J
dc.contributor.authorTsang, K
dc.contributor.authorBell, S
dc.contributor.authorLeech, C
dc.contributor.authorMarsden, M
dc.contributor.authorCarden, R
dc.contributor.authorChallen, K
dc.contributor.authorPeck, G
dc.contributor.authorHancorn, K
dc.contributor.authorDavenport, R
dc.contributor.authorBrohi, K
dc.contributor.authorWilson, MSJ
dc.contributor.authorNaTRIC
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-13T14:28:08Z
dc.date.available2021-06-05
dc.date.available2021-07-13T14:28:08Z
dc.date.issued2021-06-16
dc.identifier.citationMcElroy, L., Robinson, L., Battle, C. et al. Use of a modified Delphi process to develop research priorities in major trauma. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01722-zen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/73036
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: The burden of major trauma within the UK is ever increasing. There is a need to establish research priorities within the field. 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, Pre-hospital, Interventional, and Miscellaneous (Phases 2 and 3). Cut-off points were agreed by consensus amongst the steering subcommittees. This established a final prioritised list of research questions. RESULTS: In phase 1, 201 questions were submitted by 65 stakeholders. 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. Research priorities across the patient pathway from roadside to rehabilitation were deemed of importance. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus 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-centre multi-disciplinary research in major trauma.en_US
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherSpringer Natureen_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery
dc.subjectDelphien_US
dc.subjectMajor traumaen_US
dc.subjectResearch prioritiesen_US
dc.subjectTrauma surgeryen_US
dc.titleUse of a modified Delphi process to develop research priorities in major trauma.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00068-021-01722-z
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34132821en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-06-05
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record