Research priorities in neurocritical care

Romergryko Geocadin, T. P. Bleck, W. J. Koroshetz, C. S. Robertson, O. O. Zaidat, P. D. LeRoux, C. A C Wijman, Jose Suarez

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This summary of the last session of the First Neurocritical Care Research Conference reviews the discussions about research priorities in neurocritical care. The first presentation reviewed current projects funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health and potential models to follow including an independent Neurocritical Care Network or the creation of such a network with the goal of collaborating with already existing ones. Experienced neurointensivists then presented their views on the most common and important research questions that need to be answered and investigated in the field. Finally, utility of clinical registries was discussed emphasizing their importance as hypothesis generators. During the group discussion, interests in comparative effectiveness research, the use of physiological endpoints from monitoring and alternate trial design were expressed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)35-41
Number of pages7
JournalNeurocritical Care
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2012

Fingerprint

Comparative Effectiveness Research
Research
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Physiologic Monitoring
Registries

Keywords

  • Clinical trials
  • Consortium
  • Critical care
  • Neurocritical care
  • Research network

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Geocadin, R., Bleck, T. P., Koroshetz, W. J., Robertson, C. S., Zaidat, O. O., LeRoux, P. D., ... Suarez, J. (2012). Research priorities in neurocritical care. Neurocritical Care, 16(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-011-9611-y

Research priorities in neurocritical care. / Geocadin, Romergryko; Bleck, T. P.; Koroshetz, W. J.; Robertson, C. S.; Zaidat, O. O.; LeRoux, P. D.; Wijman, C. A C; Suarez, Jose.

In: Neurocritical Care, Vol. 16, No. 1, 02.2012, p. 35-41.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Geocadin, R, Bleck, TP, Koroshetz, WJ, Robertson, CS, Zaidat, OO, LeRoux, PD, Wijman, CAC & Suarez, J 2012, 'Research priorities in neurocritical care', Neurocritical Care, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-011-9611-y
Geocadin R, Bleck TP, Koroshetz WJ, Robertson CS, Zaidat OO, LeRoux PD et al. Research priorities in neurocritical care. Neurocritical Care. 2012 Feb;16(1):35-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-011-9611-y
Geocadin, Romergryko ; Bleck, T. P. ; Koroshetz, W. J. ; Robertson, C. S. ; Zaidat, O. O. ; LeRoux, P. D. ; Wijman, C. A C ; Suarez, Jose. / Research priorities in neurocritical care. In: Neurocritical Care. 2012 ; Vol. 16, No. 1. pp. 35-41.
@article{bbe5f070a00441258441bbc649d33d67,
title = "Research priorities in neurocritical care",
abstract = "This summary of the last session of the First Neurocritical Care Research Conference reviews the discussions about research priorities in neurocritical care. The first presentation reviewed current projects funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health and potential models to follow including an independent Neurocritical Care Network or the creation of such a network with the goal of collaborating with already existing ones. Experienced neurointensivists then presented their views on the most common and important research questions that need to be answered and investigated in the field. Finally, utility of clinical registries was discussed emphasizing their importance as hypothesis generators. During the group discussion, interests in comparative effectiveness research, the use of physiological endpoints from monitoring and alternate trial design were expressed.",
keywords = "Clinical trials, Consortium, Critical care, Neurocritical care, Research network",
author = "Romergryko Geocadin and Bleck, {T. P.} and Koroshetz, {W. J.} and Robertson, {C. S.} and Zaidat, {O. O.} and LeRoux, {P. D.} and Wijman, {C. A C} and Jose Suarez",
year = "2012",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1007/s12028-011-9611-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "35--41",
journal = "Neurocritical Care",
issn = "1541-6933",
publisher = "Humana Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Research priorities in neurocritical care

AU - Geocadin, Romergryko

AU - Bleck, T. P.

AU - Koroshetz, W. J.

AU - Robertson, C. S.

AU - Zaidat, O. O.

AU - LeRoux, P. D.

AU - Wijman, C. A C

AU - Suarez, Jose

PY - 2012/2

Y1 - 2012/2

N2 - This summary of the last session of the First Neurocritical Care Research Conference reviews the discussions about research priorities in neurocritical care. The first presentation reviewed current projects funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health and potential models to follow including an independent Neurocritical Care Network or the creation of such a network with the goal of collaborating with already existing ones. Experienced neurointensivists then presented their views on the most common and important research questions that need to be answered and investigated in the field. Finally, utility of clinical registries was discussed emphasizing their importance as hypothesis generators. During the group discussion, interests in comparative effectiveness research, the use of physiological endpoints from monitoring and alternate trial design were expressed.

AB - This summary of the last session of the First Neurocritical Care Research Conference reviews the discussions about research priorities in neurocritical care. The first presentation reviewed current projects funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health and potential models to follow including an independent Neurocritical Care Network or the creation of such a network with the goal of collaborating with already existing ones. Experienced neurointensivists then presented their views on the most common and important research questions that need to be answered and investigated in the field. Finally, utility of clinical registries was discussed emphasizing their importance as hypothesis generators. During the group discussion, interests in comparative effectiveness research, the use of physiological endpoints from monitoring and alternate trial design were expressed.

KW - Clinical trials

KW - Consortium

KW - Critical care

KW - Neurocritical care

KW - Research network

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861099104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861099104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12028-011-9611-y

DO - 10.1007/s12028-011-9611-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 21792752

AN - SCOPUS:84861099104

VL - 16

SP - 35

EP - 41

JO - Neurocritical Care

JF - Neurocritical Care

SN - 1541-6933

IS - 1

ER -