title: Developing a spinal cord injury research strategy using a structured process of evidence review and stakeholder dialogue. Part I: rapid review of SCI prioritisation literature.
abstract: METHODS
  This is a rapid evidence review.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The objective of this study was to gain an overview of the volume, nature and findings of studies regarding priorities for spinal cord injury (SCI) research.
  
  
  METHODS
  A worldwide literature search was conducted.
  
  
  METHODS
  Six medical literature databases and Google Scholar were searched for reviews in which the primary aim was to identify SCI research priorities.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Two systematic reviews were identified-one of quantitative and one of qualitative studies. The quality of the reviews was variable. Collectively, the reviews identified 31 primary studies; 24 quantitative studies totalling 5262 participants and 7 qualitative studies totalling 120 participants. Despite the difference in research paradigms, there was convergence in review findings in the areas of body impairments and relationships. The vast majority of literature within the reviews focused on the SCI patient perspective.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The reviews inform specific research topics and highlight other important research considerations, most notably those pertaining to SCI patients' perspectives on quality of life, which may be of use in determining meaningful research outcome measures. The views of other SCI research stakeholders such as researchers, clinicians, policymakers, funders and carers would help shape a bigger picture of SCI research priorities, ultimately optimising research outputs and translation into clinical practice and health policy change. Review findings informed subsequent activities in developing a regional SCI research strategy, as described in two companion papers.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  This project was funded by the Victorian Transport Accident Commission and the Australian and New Zealand SCI Network.
authors.affiliation: National Trauma Research Institute, Monash University and The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Bragge
authors.affiliation: National Trauma Research Institute, Monash University and The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
authors.forename: L
authors.identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3895-8145
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Piccenna
authors.affiliation: John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
authors.forename: J W
authors.initials: JW
authors.lastname: Middleton
authors.affiliation: The Spinal Cord Injury Network, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Williams
authors.affiliation: Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Creasey
authors.affiliation: Experimental & Regenerative Neuroscience, School of Animal Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Dunlop
authors.affiliation: Spinal Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Brown
authors.affiliation: Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.|Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
authors.forename: R L
authors.initials: RL
authors.lastname: Gruen
mesh_terms: D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000379:methods*; D006282:Health Personnel / Q000523:psychology; D006801:Humans; D012107:Research Design; D013119:Spinal Cord Injuries