Secondary analysis of a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership to facilitate knowledge translation in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM): insights from AO Spine RECODE-DCM

ObjectivesTo explore whether a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership could provide insights on knowledge translation within the field of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).DesignSecondary analysis of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process for DCM.Participants and s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ open 2023-07, Vol.13 (7), p.e064296-e064296
Hauptverfasser: Davies, Benjamin, Brannigan, Jamie, Mowforth, Oliver D, Khan, Danyal, McNair, Angus G K, Tetreault, Lindsay, Sadler, Iwan, Sarewitz, Ellen, Aarabi, Bizhan, Kwon, Brian, Gronlund, Toto, Rahimi-Movaghar, Vafa, Zipser, Carl Moritz, Hutchinson, Peter John, Kurpad, Shekar, Harrop, James S, Wilson, Jefferson R, Guest, James D, Fehlings, Michael G, Kotter, Mark R N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:ObjectivesTo explore whether a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership could provide insights on knowledge translation within the field of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).DesignSecondary analysis of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process for DCM.Participants and settingDCM stake holders, including spinal surgeons, people with myelopathy and other healthcare professionals, were surveyed internationally. Research suggestions submitted by stakeholders but considered answered were identified. Sampling characteristics of respondents were compared with the overall cohort to identify subgroups underserved by current knowledge translation.ResultsThe survey was completed by 423 individuals from 68 different countries. A total of 22% of participants submitted research suggestions that were considered ‘answered’. There was a significant difference between responses from different stakeholder groups (p
ISSN:2044-6055
2044-6055
DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064296