ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2025
High Priority Traumatic Brain Injury Science: Analysis of the National Trauma Research Action Plan.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe National Trauma Research Action Plan convened 11 topic area panels to complete consensus-driven Delphi surveys to identify high priority trauma research questions. The Neurotrauma Panel identified questions relating to interventional and comparative effectiveness trials in severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) critical care as highest priority. This qualitative secondary analysis aims to translate results across several Delphi panels into potential studies in sTBI critical care.
methodsHigh priority consensus research questions related to sTBI in the critical phase of care (ranked >6.5 on a 1-9 Likert scale) were screened from the Neurotrauma, Critical Care, Geriatric, and Long-Term Outcomes Panels results. Using grounded theory, two reviewers inductively open-coded questions independently and then refined them for consensus. A similar approach was used to recategorize questions into codes. Each code was then characterized into research project(s) with an aim, design, exposure(s), and outcome(s).
resultsAmong 376 high-priority questions reaching consensus, 55 related to sTBI critical care. Twelve projects emerged across eight consensus thematic codes: biomarkers (1 project, average priority score/range 6.92), imaging (1, 6.84), prognostication (1, 6.77), novel neuromonitoring (3, 6.61-6.77), intracranial pressure/cerebral perfusion pressure (2, 6.67-6.76), coagulopathy (2, 6.66-6.74), early rehabilitation (1, 6.67), and pharmacologic intervention (1, 6.66).
conclusionsThis National Trauma Research Action Plan secondary analysis identified several high-priority research projects in sTBI critical care. While some questions are being addressed in ongoing trials, investigators and funding agencies should consider using these consensus-driven Delphi panel results and subsequent analyses to prioritize future research proposals.
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.