Repository logo
  • Log In
    Log in via Symplectic to deposit your publication(s).
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • Research Outputs
  • Statistics
  • Log In
    Log in via Symplectic to deposit your publication(s).
  1. Home
  2. Faculty of Medicine
  3. Faculty of Medicine
  4. Research priorities by professional background - A detailed analysis of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership
 
  • Details
Research priorities by professional background - A detailed analysis of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership
OA Location
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1751143715609954
Author(s)
Arulkumaran, N
Reay, H
Brett, SJ
JLA Intensive Care Research Priority Setting Partnership
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
The Intensive Care Foundation, in partnership with the James Lind Alliance, has supported a national project to identify and prioritise unanswered questions about adult intensive care that are important to people who have been critically ill, their families, and the health professionals who care for them. We conducted a secondary analysis to explore differences in priorities determined by different respondent groups in order to identify different groups' perceptions of gaps in knowledge. There were two surveys conducted as part of the original project. Survey 1 comprised a single open question to identify important research topics; survey 2 aimed to prioritise these topics using a 10-point Likert scale. In survey 1, despite clear differences in suggestions amongst the respondent groups, themes of comfort/communication and post-ICU rehabilitation were the within the top 2 suggestions across all groups. Patients and relatives suggested research topics to which they could easily relate, whereas there was a greater breadth of suggestions from clinicians. In survey 2, the number of research priorities that received a mode score of 10 varied from 1 to 36. Patients scored 36 out of the 37 topics with a mode score of 10. All other groups scored topics with more discrimination, with the number of topics with a mode score of 10 ranging from 1 to 20. Differences in the proportions of the representative groups are therefore unlikely to have translated to an impartial conclusion. Clinicians, patients, and family members have jointly identified the research priorities for UK ICM practice.
Date Issued
2016-05-01
Date Acceptance
2015-10-01
Citation
Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2016, 17 (2), pp.111-116
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/53998
DOI
https://www.dx.doi.org/10.1177/1751143715609954
ISSN
1751-1437
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Start Page
111
End Page
116
Journal / Book Title
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Volume
17
Issue
2
Copyright Statement
© The Intensive Care Society 2015
Identifier
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28979474
PII: 10.1177_1751143715609954
Subjects
Adult
consensus
intensive care
research
uncertainty
Publication Status
Published
Coverage Spatial
England
Date Publish Online
2015-10-30
About
Spiral Depositing with Spiral Publishing with Spiral Symplectic
Contact us
Open access team Report an issue
Other Services
Scholarly Communications Library Services
logo

Imperial College London

South Kensington Campus

London SW7 2AZ, UK

tel: +44 (0)20 7589 5111

Accessibility Modern slavery statement Cookie Policy

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback