Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

Berlin Brandenburg

and
and

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Gruen, Russell L.  (21)
  • Brain Injuries
Type of Medium
Language
Year
  • 1
    Language: English
    In: BMC Medical Research Methodology, 01 June 2011, Vol.11(1), p.92
    Description: Abstract Background Evidence mapping describes the quantity, design and characteristics of research in broad topic areas, in contrast to systematic reviews, which usually address narrowly-focused research questions. The breadth of evidence mapping helps to identify evidence gaps, and may guide future research efforts. The Global Evidence Mapping (GEM) Initiative was established in 2007 to create evidence maps providing an overview of existing research in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). Methods The GEM evidence mapping method involved three core tasks: 〈p indent="1"〉1. Setting the boundaries and context of the map: Definitions for the fields of TBI and SCI were clarified, the prehospital, acute inhospital and rehabilitation phases of care were delineated and relevant stakeholders (patients, carers, clinicians, researchers and policymakers) who could contribute to the mapping were identified. Researchable clinical questions were developed through consultation with key stakeholders and a broad literature search. 〈p indent="1"〉2. Searching for and selection of relevant studies: Evidence search and selection involved development of specific search strategies, development of inclusion and exclusion criteria, searching of relevant databases and independent screening and selection by two researchers. 〈p indent="1"〉3. Reporting on yield and study characteristics: Data extraction was performed at two levels - 'interventions and study design' and 'detailed study characteristics'. The evidence map and commentary reflected the depth of data extraction. Results One hundred and twenty-nine researchable clinical questions in TBI and SCI were identified. These questions were then prioritised into high (n = 60) and low (n = 69) importance by the stakeholders involved in question development. Since 2007, 58 263 abstracts have been screened, 3 731 full text articles have been reviewed and 1 644 relevant neurotrauma publications have been mapped, covering fifty-three high priority questions. Conclusions GEM Initiative evidence maps have a broad range of potential end-users including funding agencies, researchers and clinicians. Evidence mapping is at least as resource-intensive as systematic reviewing. The GEM Initiative has made advancements in evidence mapping, most notably in the area of question development and prioritisation. Evidence mapping complements other review methods for describing existing research, informing future research efforts, and addressing evidence gaps.
    Keywords: Medicine
    ISSN: 1471-2288
    E-ISSN: 1471-2288
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Language: English
    In: The Lancet, 22 September 2012, Vol.380(9847), pp.1088-1098
    Description: Severe traumatic brain injury remains a major health-care problem worldwide. Although major progress has been made in understanding of the pathophysiology of this injury, this has not yet led to substantial improvements in outcome. In this report, we address present knowledge and its limitations, research innovations, and clinical implications. Improved outcomes for patients with severe traumatic brain injury could result from progress in pharmacological and other treatments, neural repair and regeneration, optimisation of surgical indications and techniques, and combination and individually targeted treatments. Expanded classification of traumatic brain injury and innovations in research design will underpin these advances. We are optimistic that further gains in outcome for patients with severe traumatic brain injury will be achieved in the next decade.
    Keywords: Medicine
    ISSN: 0140-6736
    E-ISSN: 1474-547X
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, May 2013, Vol.66(5), pp.496-502.e2
    Description: We present a multistep process for identifying priority research areas in rehabilitation and long-term care of traumatic brain-injured (TBI) patients. In particular, we aimed to (1) identify which stakeholders should be involved; (2) identify what methods are appropriate; (3) examine different criteria for the generation of research priority areas; and (4) test the feasibility of linkage and exchange among researchers, decision makers, and other potential users of the research. Potential research questions were identified and developed using an initial scoping meeting and preliminary literature search, followed by a facilitated mapping workshop and an online survey. Identified research questions were then prioritized against specific criteria (clinical importance, novelty, and controversy). Existing evidence was then mapped to the high-priority questions using usual processes for search, screening, and selection. A broad range of stakeholders were then brought together at a forum to identify priority research themes for future research investment. Using clinical and research leaders, smaller targeted planning workshops prioritized specific research projects for each of the identified themes. Twenty-six specific questions about TBI rehabilitation were generated, 14 of which were high priority. No one method identified all high-priority questions. Methods that relied solely on the views of clinicians and researchers identified fewer high-priority questions compared with methods that used broader stakeholder engagement. Evidence maps of these high-priority questions yielded a number of evidence gaps. Priority questions and evidence maps were then used to inform a research forum, which identified 12 priority themes for future research. Our research demonstrates the value of a multistep and multimethod process involving many different types of stakeholders for prioritizing research to improve the rehabilitation outcomes of people who have suffered TBI. Enhancing stakeholder representation can be augmented using a combination of methods and a process of linkage and exchange. This process can inform decisions about prioritization of research areas.
    Keywords: Prioritization ; Traumatic Brain Injury ; Research Funding ; Evidence Mapping ; Research Gaps ; Rehabilitation ; Medicine
    ISSN: 0895-4356
    E-ISSN: 1878-5921
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: PLoS ONE, 2016, Vol.11(2)
    Description: Background The Neurotrauma Evidence Translation (NET) Trial aims to design and evaluate the effectiveness of a targeted theory-and evidence-informed intervention to increase the uptake of evidence-based recommended practices for the management of patients who present to an emergency department (ED) with mild head injuries. When designing interventions to bring about change in organisational settings such as the ED, it is important to understand the impact of the context to ensure successful implementation of practice change. Few studies explicitly use organisational theory to study which factors are likely to be most important to address when planning change processes in the ED. Yet, this setting may have a unique set of organisational pressures that need to be taken into account when implementing new clinical practices. This paper aims to provide an in depth analysis of the organisational context in which ED management of mild head injuries and implementation of new practices occurs, drawing upon organisational level theory. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ED staff in Australia. The interviews explored the organisational context in relation to change and organisational factors influencing the management of patients presenting with mild head injuries. Two researchers coded the interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. The “model of diffusion in service organisations” was used to guide analyses and organisation of the results. Results Nine directors, 20 doctors and 13 nurses of 13 hospitals were interviewed. With regard to characteristics of the innovation (i.e. the recommended practices) the most important factor was whether they were perceived as being in line with values and needs. Tension for change (the degree to which stakeholders perceive the current situation as intolerable or needing change) was relatively low for managing acute mild head injury symptoms, and mixed for managing longer-term symptoms (higher change commitment, but relatively low change efficacy). Regarding implementation processes, the importance of (visible) senior leadership for all professions involved was identified as a critical factor. An unpredictable and hectic environment brings challenges in creating an environment in which team-based and organisational learning can thrive (system antecedents for innovation). In addition, the position of the ED as the entry-point of the hospital points to the relevance of securing buy-in from other units. Conclusions We identified several organisational factors relevant to realising change in ED management of patients who present with mild head injuries. These factors will inform the intervention design and process evaluation in a trial evaluating the effectiveness of our implementation intervention.
    Keywords: Research Article ; Medicine And Health Sciences ; Medicine And Health Sciences ; People And Places ; Medicine And Health Sciences ; Medicine And Health Sciences ; People And Places ; People And Places ; Biology And Life Sciences ; Biology And Life Sciences ; Social Sciences ; Biology And Life Sciences ; Computer And Information Sciences ; Social Sciences ; Medicine And Health Sciences ; Medicine And Health Sciences
    E-ISSN: 1932-6203
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Language: English
    In: BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 17, 2011, Vol.11, p.92
    Description: Background Evidence mapping describes the quantity, design and characteristics of research in broad topic areas, in contrast to systematic reviews, which usually address narrowly-focused research questions. The breadth of evidence mapping helps to identify evidence gaps, and may guide future research efforts. The Global Evidence Mapping (GEM) Initiative was established in 2007 to create evidence maps providing an overview of existing research in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). Methods The GEM evidence mapping method involved three core tasks: Results One hundred and twenty-nine researchable clinical questions in TBI and SCI were identified. These questions were then prioritised into high (n = 60) and low (n = 69) importance by the stakeholders involved in question development. Since 2007, 58 263 abstracts have been screened, 3 731 full text articles have been reviewed and 1 644 relevant neurotrauma publications have been mapped, covering fifty-three high priority questions. Conclusions GEM Initiative evidence maps have a broad range of potential end-users including funding agencies, researchers and clinicians. Evidence mapping is at least as resource-intensive as systematic reviewing. The GEM Initiative has made advancements in evidence mapping, most notably in the area of question development and prioritisation. Evidence mapping complements other review methods for describing existing research, informing future research efforts, and addressing evidence gaps.
    Keywords: Spinal Cord Injuries -- Research ; Brain Injuries -- Research ; Observational Studies -- Research
    ISSN: 1471-2288
    Source: Cengage Learning, Inc.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Language: English
    In: BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 17, 2011, Vol.11, p.92
    Description: Background Evidence mapping describes the quantity, design and characteristics of research in broad topic areas, in contrast to systematic reviews, which usually address narrowly-focused research questions. The breadth of evidence mapping helps to identify evidence gaps, and may guide future research efforts. The Global Evidence Mapping (GEM) Initiative was established in 2007 to create evidence maps providing an overview of existing research in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). Methods The GEM evidence mapping method involved three core tasks: Results One hundred and twenty-nine researchable clinical questions in TBI and SCI were identified. These questions were then prioritised into high (n = 60) and low (n = 69) importance by the stakeholders involved in question development. Since 2007, 58 263 abstracts have been screened, 3 731 full text articles have been reviewed and 1 644 relevant neurotrauma publications have been mapped, covering fifty-three high priority questions. Conclusions GEM Initiative evidence maps have a broad range of potential end-users including funding agencies, researchers and clinicians. Evidence mapping is at least as resource-intensive as systematic reviewing. The GEM Initiative has made advancements in evidence mapping, most notably in the area of question development and prioritisation. Evidence mapping complements other review methods for describing existing research, informing future research efforts, and addressing evidence gaps.
    Keywords: Spinal Cord Injuries -- Research ; Brain Injuries -- Research ; Observational Studies -- Research
    ISSN: 1471-2288
    Source: Cengage Learning, Inc.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    Language: English
    In: PLoS ONE, 01 January 2018, Vol.13(6), p.e0198676
    Description: OBJECTIVE:To appraise the currency, completeness and quality of evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) of acute management of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS:We conducted comprehensive searches to March 2016 for published, English-language SRs and RCTs of acute management of moderate to severe TBI. Systematic reviews and RCTs were grouped under 12 broad intervention categories. For each review, we mapped the included and non-included RCTs, noting the reasons why RCTs were omitted. An SR was judged as 'current' when it included the most recently published RCT we found on their topic, and 'complete' when it included every RCT we found that met its inclusion criteria, taking account of when the review was conducted. Quality was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist (trichotomised into low, moderate and high quality). FINDINGS:We included 85 SRs and 213 RCTs examining the effectiveness of treatments for acute management of moderate to severe TBI. The most frequently reviewed interventions were hypothermia (n = 17, 14.2%), hypertonic saline and/or mannitol (n = 9, 7.5%) and surgery (n = 8, 6.7%). Of the 80 single-intervention SRs, approximately half (n = 44, 55%) were judged as current and two-thirds (n = 52, 65.0%) as complete. When considering only the most recently published review on each intervention (n = 25), currency increased to 72.0% (n = 18). Less than half of the 85 SRs were judged as high quality (n = 38, 44.7%), and nearly 20% were low quality (n = 16, 18.8%). Only 16 (20.0%) of the single-intervention reviews (and none of the five multi-intervention reviews) were judged as current, complete and high-quality. These included reviews of red blood cell transfusion, hypothermia, management guided by intracranial pressure, pharmacological agents (various) and prehospital intubation. Over three-quarters (n = 167, 78.4%) of the 213 RCTs were included in one or more SR. Of the remainder, 17 (8.0%) RCTs post-dated or were out of scope of existing SRs, and 29 (13.6%) were on interventions that have not been assessed in SRs. CONCLUSION:A substantial number of SRs in acute management of moderate to severe TBI lack currency, completeness and quality. We have identified both potential evidence gaps and also substantial research waste. Novel review methods, such as Living Systematic Reviews, may ameliorate these shortcomings and enhance utility and reliability of the evidence underpinning clinical care.
    Keywords: Sciences (General)
    E-ISSN: 1932-6203
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    Language: English
    In: Injury, Dec, 2014, Vol.45, p.1834(8)
    Description: To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.06.004 Byline: Lee-anne S. Costello, Fiona E. Lithander, Russell L. Gruen, Lauren T. Williams Abstract: Patients who have sustained traumatic brain injury (TBI) have increased nutritional requirements yet are often unable to eat normally, and adequate nutritional therapy is needed to optimise recovery. The aim of the current scoping review was to describe the existing evidence for improved outcomes with optimal nutrition therapy in adult patients with moderate to severe TBI, and to identify gaps in the literature to inform future research. Author Affiliation: (a) Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Health, The University of Canberra, Bruce, Australian Capital Territory 2601, Australia (b) Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia (c) National Trauma Research Institute, The Alfred Hospital and Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia (d) Nutrition and Dietetics, Faculty of Health, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland 4217, Australia Article History: Accepted 6 June 2014
    Keywords: Brain Injuries -- Diet Therapy ; Brain Injuries -- Patient Outcomes ; Nutritional Requirements ; Medical Research
    ISSN: 0020-1383
    Source: Cengage Learning, Inc.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    Language: English
    In: Injury, December 2014, Vol.45(12), pp.1834-1841
    Description: Patients who have sustained traumatic brain injury (TBI) have increased nutritional requirements yet are often unable to eat normally, and adequate nutritional therapy is needed to optimise recovery. The aim of the current scoping review was to describe the existing evidence for improved outcomes with optimal nutrition therapy in adult patients with moderate to severe TBI, and to identify gaps in the literature to inform future research. Using an exploratory scoping study approach, Medline, Cinahl, Embase, CENTRAL, the Neurotrauma reviews in the Global Evidence Mapping (GEM) Initiative, and Evidence Reviews in Acquired Brain Injury (ERABI) were searched from 2003 to 14 November 2013 using variations of the search terms ‘traumatic brain injury’ and ‘nutrition’. Articles were included if they reported mortality, morbidity, or length of stay outcomes, and were classified according to the nature of nutrition intervention and study design. Twenty relevant articles were identified of which: 12 were original research articles; two were systematic reviews; one a meta-analysis; and five were narrative reviews. Of these, eleven explored timing of feed provision, eight explored route of administration of feeding, nine examined the provision of specific nutrients, and none examined feeding environment. Some explored more than one intervention. Three sets of guidelines which contain feeding recommendations were also identified. Inconsistency within nutrition intervention methods and outcome measures means that the present evidence base is inadequate for the construction of best practice guidelines for nutrition and TBI. Further research is necessary to elucidate the optimal nutrition therapy for adults with TBI with respect to the timing, route of administration, nutrient provision and feeding environment. A consensus on the ideal outcome measure and the most appropriate method and timing of its measurement is required as a foundation for this evidence base.
    Keywords: Brain Injury ; Nutrition Intervention ; Trauma
    ISSN: 0020-1383
    E-ISSN: 1879-0267
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    Language: English
    In: Implementation Science, Jan 13, 2014, Vol.9(1)
    Description: Background Mild traumatic brain injury is a frequent cause of presentation to emergency departments. Despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines in this area, there is variation in practice. One of the aims of the Neurotrauma Evidence Translation program is to develop and evaluate a targeted, theory- and evidence-informed intervention to improve the management of mild traumatic brain injury in Australian emergency departments. This study is the first step in the intervention development process and uses the Theoretical Domains Framework to explore the factors perceived to influence the uptake of four key evidence-based recommended practices for managing mild traumatic brain injury. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted with emergency staff in the Australian state of Victoria. The interview guide was developed using the Theoretical Domains Framework to explore current practice and to identify the factors perceived to influence practice. Two researchers coded the interview transcripts using thematic content analysis. Results A total of 42 participants (9 Directors, 20 doctors and 13 nurses) were interviewed over a seven-month period. The results suggested that (i) the prospective assessment of post-traumatic amnesia was influenced by: knowledge; beliefs about consequences; environmental context and resources; skills; social/professional role and identity; and beliefs about capabilities; (ii) the use of guideline-developed criteria or decision rules to inform the appropriate use of a CT scan was influenced by: knowledge; beliefs about consequences; environmental context and resources; memory, attention and decision processes; beliefs about capabilities; social influences; skills and behavioral regulation; (iii) providing verbal and written patient information on discharge was influenced by: beliefs about consequences; environmental context and resources; memory, attention and decision processes; social/professional role and identity; and knowledge; (iv) the practice of providing brief, routine follow-up on discharge was influenced by: environmental context and resources; social/professional role and identity; knowledge; beliefs about consequences; and motivation and goals. Conclusions Using the Theoretical Domains Framework, factors thought to influence the management of mild traumatic brain injury in the emergency department were identified. These factors present theoretically based targets for a future intervention. Keywords: Emergency department management, Mild traumatic brain injury, Theoretical Domains Framework, Semi-structured interviews
    Keywords: Brain Injuries–Therapy ; Clinical Competence–Organization & Administration ; Communication–Organization & Administration ; Emergency Service, Hospital–Organization & Administration ; Environment–Organization & Administration ; Evidence-Based Medicine–Organization & Administration ; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice–Organization & Administration ; Humans–Organization & Administration ; Patient Education As Topic–Organization & Administration ; Personnel, Hospital–Organization & Administration ; Physician'S Practice Patterns–Organization & Administration ; Practice Guidelines As Topic–Organization & Administration ; Professional Role–Organization & Administration ; Qualitative Research–Organization & Administration ; Victoria–Organization & Administration;
    ISSN: 1748-5908
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages