ArticleBMJ open2024
Research priorities for the management of major trauma: an international priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trauma as a critical condition in the very old: assessment, care pathways and outcome differences.European geriatric medicine · 2026Review
- Identifying research priorities for post-collision care in the United Kingdom: outcomes and methodological adaptations from the final prioritisation workshop.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- What are the top 10 global research priorities for perianal Crohn's disease? The Global Perianal Crohn's Disease Priority Setting Partnership.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2026Article
- Identifying Research Priorities in Canadian Adult and Pediatric Critical Care: Results From a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.Critical care medicine · 2026Article
- Psychological outcomes in paediatric major trauma patients who require invasive management: a systematic review.BMJ paediatrics open · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Identifying research priorities for post-collision care in the United Kingdom: protocol for a road injury priority setting partnership.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Consensus-based research priorities for post-collision care in the Western Cape province of South Africa.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2025Article
- Editorial for Recent Developments in Emergency Trauma Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to determine research priorities for the management of major trauma, representing the shared priorities of patients, their families, carers and healthcare professionals. DESIGN/
settingAn international research priority-setting partnership.
participantsPeople who have experienced major trauma, their carers and relatives, and healthcare professionals involved in treating patients after major trauma. The scope included chest, abdominal and pelvic injuries as well as major bleeding, multiple injuries and those that threaten life or limb.
methodsA multiphase priority-setting exercise was conducted in partnership with the James Lind Alliance over 24 months (November 2021-October 2023). An international survey asked respondents to submit their research uncertainties which were then combined into several indicative questions. The existing evidence was searched to ensure that the questions had not already been sufficiently answered. A second international survey asked respondents to prioritise the research questions. A final shortlist of 19 questions was taken to a stakeholder workshop, where consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities.
resultsA total of 1572 uncertainties, submitted by 417 respondents (including 132 patients and carers), were received during the initial survey. These were refined into 53 unique indicative questions, of which all 53 were judged to be true uncertainties after reviewing the existing evidence. 373 people (including 115 patients and carers) responded to the interim prioritisation survey and 19 questions were taken to a final consensus workshop between patients, carers and healthcare professionals. At the final workshop, a consensus was reached for the ranking of the top 10 questions.
conclusionsThe top 10 research priorities for major trauma include patient-centred questions regarding pain relief and prehospital management, multidisciplinary working, novel technologies, rehabilitation and holistic support. These shared priorities will now be used to guide funders and teams wishing to research major trauma around the globe.
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.