ArticleBMJ open2022
Elbow conditions: research priorities setting in partnership with the James Lind Alliance.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implant selection and fixation in radial head arthroplasty: A qualitative analysis of surgeon decision-making.Shoulder & elbow · 2026Article
- Volume-outcome relationships for primary total elbow arthroplasty surgery in England: Analysis of the hospital episode statistics dataset.Shoulder & elbow · 2026Article
- Investigating the effectiveness of stretching interventions on post-traumatic elbow stiffness: a systematic review.JSES international · 2025Review
- Exploring the Information Needs of People With Elbow Osteoarthritis Seeking Healthcare: A Qualitative Interview Study.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Article
- Surgical management of cubital tunnel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo undertake a UK-based James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership for elbow conditions and be representative of the views of patients, carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs).
settingThis was a national collaborative study organised through the British Elbow and Shoulder Society.
participantsAdult patients, carers and HCPs who have managed or experienced elbow conditions, their carers and HCPs in the UK involved in managing of elbow conditions.
methodsThe rigorous JLA priority setting methodology was followed. Electronic and paper scoping surveys were distributed to identify potential research priority questions (RPQs). Initial responses were reviewed and a literature search was performed to cross-check categorised questions. Those questions already sufficiently answered were excluded and the remaining questions were ranked in a second survey according to priority for future elbow conditions research. Using the JLA methodology, responses from HCP and patients were combined to create a list of the top 18 questions. These were further reviewed in a dedicated multistakeholder workshop where the top 10 RPQs were agreed by consensus.
resultsThe process was completed over 24 months. The initial survey resulted in 467 questions from 165 respondents (73% HCPs and 27% patients/carers). These questions were reviewed and combined into 46 summary topics comprising: tendinopathy, distal biceps pathology, arthritis, stiffness, trauma, arthroplasty and cubital tunnel syndrome. The second (interim prioritisation) survey had 250 respondents (72% HCP and 28% patients/carers). The top 18 ranked questions from this survey were taken to the final workshop where a consensus was reached on the top 10 RPQs.
conclusionsThe top 10 RPQs highlight areas of importance that currently lack sufficient evidence to guide diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of elbow conditions. This collaborative process will guide researchers and funders regarding the topics that should receive most future attention and benefit patients and HCPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.