The National Institute for Health Research Critical Care Research Priority Setting Survey 2018
The National Institute for Health Research Critical Care Research Priority Setting Survey 2018
Introduction Defining research priorities in intensive care is key to determining appropriate allocation of funding. Several topics were identified from the 2014 James Lind Alliance priority setting exercise conducted with the Intensive Care Society. The James Lind Alliance process included significant (and vital) patient/public contribution, but excluded professionals without a bedside role. As a result it may have failed to identify potential early-stage translational research topics, which are more likely identified by medical and/or academic members of relevant specialist basic science groups. The objective of the present project was to complement the James Lind Alliance project by generating an updated list of research priorities by facilitating academic research input. Method A survey was conducted by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) to identify the key research priorities from intensive care clinicians, including allied health professionals and academics, along with any evolving themes arising from translational research. Feasibility of all identified topics were then discussed and allocated to themes by a joint clinical academics/NIHR focus group. Results The survey was completed by 94 intensive care clinicians (including subspecialists), academics and allied health professions. In total, 203 research questions were identified, with the top five themes focusing on: appropriate case selection (e.g. who and when to treat; 24%), ventilation (7%), sepsis (6%), delirium (5%) and rehabilitation (5%). Discussion Utilising a methodology distinct from that employed by the James Lind Alliance process, from a broad spectrum of intensive care clinicians/scientists, enabled identification of a variety of priority research areas. These topics can now inform not only the investigator-led research agenda, but will also be considered in due course by the NIHR for potential future funding calls.
198-201
Tatham, Kate
fcbe4f21-7562-45bc-a4a2-8dd210049dad
McAuley, Daniel F.
03fd8aff-b05b-4bd6-8f4c-952f598095c1
Borthwick, Mark
c9799681-4f55-4071-9012-89d11ad877cb
Henderson, Neil
31a6faf3-f34d-4028-a36a-7fe7f1a30ab5
Bashevoy, Gemma
21205210-febd-4d25-a8eb-ce88d265b6ff
Brett, Stephen J.
24863e86-fb61-428d-bac6-b517912145b2
1 August 2020
Tatham, Kate
fcbe4f21-7562-45bc-a4a2-8dd210049dad
McAuley, Daniel F.
03fd8aff-b05b-4bd6-8f4c-952f598095c1
Borthwick, Mark
c9799681-4f55-4071-9012-89d11ad877cb
Henderson, Neil
31a6faf3-f34d-4028-a36a-7fe7f1a30ab5
Bashevoy, Gemma
21205210-febd-4d25-a8eb-ce88d265b6ff
Brett, Stephen J.
24863e86-fb61-428d-bac6-b517912145b2
Tatham, Kate, McAuley, Daniel F., Borthwick, Mark, Henderson, Neil, Bashevoy, Gemma and Brett, Stephen J.
(2020)
The National Institute for Health Research Critical Care Research Priority Setting Survey 2018.
Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 21 (3), .
(doi:10.1177/1751143719862244).
Abstract
Introduction Defining research priorities in intensive care is key to determining appropriate allocation of funding. Several topics were identified from the 2014 James Lind Alliance priority setting exercise conducted with the Intensive Care Society. The James Lind Alliance process included significant (and vital) patient/public contribution, but excluded professionals without a bedside role. As a result it may have failed to identify potential early-stage translational research topics, which are more likely identified by medical and/or academic members of relevant specialist basic science groups. The objective of the present project was to complement the James Lind Alliance project by generating an updated list of research priorities by facilitating academic research input. Method A survey was conducted by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) to identify the key research priorities from intensive care clinicians, including allied health professionals and academics, along with any evolving themes arising from translational research. Feasibility of all identified topics were then discussed and allocated to themes by a joint clinical academics/NIHR focus group. Results The survey was completed by 94 intensive care clinicians (including subspecialists), academics and allied health professions. In total, 203 research questions were identified, with the top five themes focusing on: appropriate case selection (e.g. who and when to treat; 24%), ventilation (7%), sepsis (6%), delirium (5%) and rehabilitation (5%). Discussion Utilising a methodology distinct from that employed by the James Lind Alliance process, from a broad spectrum of intensive care clinicians/scientists, enabled identification of a variety of priority research areas. These topics can now inform not only the investigator-led research agenda, but will also be considered in due course by the NIHR for potential future funding calls.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 8 July 2019
Published date: 1 August 2020
Additional Information:
© The Intensive Care Society 2019
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 467944
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/467944
ISSN: 1751-1437
PURE UUID: 14efc3ab-0905-4040-9130-c111524e20a2
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 26 Jul 2022 16:39
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:37
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Kate Tatham
Author:
Daniel F. McAuley
Author:
Mark Borthwick
Author:
Neil Henderson
Author:
Gemma Bashevoy
Author:
Stephen J. Brett
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics