Search

Objectives: To identify and prioritize research to inform research agenda development for Canadian chiropractors working in sport. Methods: Clinicians, researchers and leaders from the Canadian sports chiropractic field were invited to participate in 1) a survey to refine a list of research priorities, 2) a Delphi procedure to determine consensus on these priorities, and 3) a prioritization survey. Results: The top three research priorities were 1) effects of interventions on athletic outcomes, 2) research about sports healthcare teams, and 3) clinical research related to spinal manipulative and mobilization therapy. The three highest ranked conditions to research were 1) low back pain, 2) neck pain, and 3) concussion. Collaborations with sports physicians and universities/colleges were rated as important research collaborations to pursue. Conclusions: These results represent the Canadian sports chiropractic perspective to research priority setting and will be used alongside stakeholder input to set the first research agenda for the Canadian sports chiropractic field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of European Journal of Applied Linguistics is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: A Canadian sports chiropractic research agenda has yet to be defined. The Delphi method can be utilized to achieve this purpose; however, the sample of experts who participate can influence the results. To better inform sample selection for future research agenda development, we set out to determine if differences in opinions about research priorities exist between chiropractors who have their sports specialty designation and those who do not. Methods: Fifteen sports clinical practice chiropractors who have their sports fellowship designation and fifteen without, were interviewed with a set of standardized questions about sports chiropractic research priorities. A centering resonance analysis and cluster analysis were conducted on the interview responses. Results: The two practitioner groups differed in their opinions about the type of research that they would like to see conducted, the research that would impact their clinical practice the most, and where they believed research was lacking. However, both groups were similar in their opinions about research collaborations. Conclusion: Sports clinical practice chiropractors, with their sports specialty designation and those without, differed in their opinions about sports chiropractic research priorities; however, they had similar opinions about research collaborations. These results suggest that it may be important to sample from both practitioner groups in future studies aimed at developing research agendas for chiropractic research in sport. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We involved patients and clinicians in Alberta, Canada, to establish research priorities in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), using an approach based on a model proposed by the James Lind Alliance (JLA)., Methods: We adapted the 4-step JLA process to engage women with GDM and clinicians to identify uncertainties about the management of GDM. Uncertainties were identified through a survey and a review of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Uncertainties were short-listed by a steering committee, followed by a 1-day facilitated workshop using a nominal group format and involving a similar number of patients and clinicians, who identified the top 10 research priorities., Results: Across the various survey formats, 75 individuals submitted 389 uncertainties, the majority (44; 59%) coming from patients. We removed 9 questions as being out of scope or unclear, and 41 were identified on a review of CPG, resulting in a total of 421 uncertainties. After the priority setting process, the final top 10 research priorities included questions about a simpler, more accurate and convenient screening test; risk factors for GDM; improving postpartum diabetes screening; the impact of GDM on the future health of the children; lifestyle challenges and mental health issues; safety, effectiveness and/or impact of diet and/or medication treatments; appropriate timing for delivery; and how care is provided, organized or communicated., Conclusions: These top 10 research priorities were informed through a comprehensive and transparent process involving women who have experienced GDM as well as clinicians, and they may be regarded as research priorities for GDM., (Copyright © 2016 Canadian Diabetes Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)