Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
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
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
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
Do you wish to request the book?
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
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
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
2023
Overview
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<0.005). Spinal surgeons were the group which was most likely to submit an ‘answered’ research question. Respondents from South America were also most likely to submit ‘answered’ questions, when compared with other regions. However, there was no significant difference between responses from different stakeholder regions (p=0.4).ConclusionsKnowledge translation challenges exist within DCM. This practical approach to measuring knowledge translation may offer a more responsive assessment to guide interventions, complementing existing metrics.
Publisher
British Medical Journal Publishing Group,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Publishing Group
Subject
