What the fuck are the top priorities in stroke research? Do we even know what we should be researching? Or is this just a crapshoot hoping to find something useful? A great stroke association would have a defined strategy on what research should be funded next in order to solve all the fucking problems in stroke.
http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=158821&CultureCode=en
Experts have published a list of the most urgent priorities for
researching a debilitating condition that affects more than 10 million
people in the UK.
Published in The Lancet, the top 10 research priorities for tackling
mild to moderate hearing loss aims to re-focus future studies on areas
which could potentially have the greatest impact in furthering
understanding of the condition and developing successful new treatments.
Co-author Dr Helen Henshaw, a University of Nottingham academic based
at the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Hearing
Biomedical Research Unit, said: “Although hearing loss is not deadly,
it can have a profound impact on people’s ability to maintain
relationships, lead a normal life and go out to work.
“With such a huge proportion of the population affected by this
condition, it is vital that hearing research funding is prioritised for
the questions which are most important to them.”
Despite being one of the six health priority areas for the NIHR,
significantly less is spent on hearing research – just £47 per one lost
year of healthy life compared to other priority conditions such as sight
loss (£99) and diabetes (£399).
Currently, evidence which underpins clinical practice is typically
provided by researchers in universities that are far-removed from
frontline clinical services and which often does not take into account
the views and experiences of key stakeholders.
The list of Top 10 hearing loss priorities were identified by an
innovative partnership, the James Lind Alliance, which brings together
patients, carers and clinicians to identify the unanswered questions
about the effects of treatments that they agree are the most important.
It canvassed the views of more than 460 people on what they believed
were the most significant treatment uncertainties before asking them to
rank the importance of more than 80 research questions connected to
these areas on a scale of importance. The top 30 ranked questions were
then taken forward to a final prioritisation workshop, which then
narrowed these down to the final top 10 based on consensus from a group
of patients, family, friends and clinicians.
The final top 10 includes questions about the prevention (or cure),
diagnosis and treatment, with the majority of treatment questions
concerned with aspects of hearing aid provision.
All of the uncertainties identified by the James Lind Alliance
Priority Setting Partnership, including the top 10, will be uploaded to
the Database of Uncertainties About the Effects of Treatments to be made
widely to the public, the research community, research commissioners
and research funders.
The project was supported by funding awarded by the Nottingham
University Hospitals Charity and the National Institute for Health
Research Biomedical Research Unit Programme.
Full bibliographic informationHelen Henshaw, Linda Sharkey, David Crowe, Melanie Ferguson; Research priorities for mild-to-moderate hearing loss in adults;
The Lancet Vol 386 November 28, 2015; http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)01048-X/abstract
No comments:
Post a Comment