You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Editorial
Whose research agenda is it? Reconciling the views of researchers and sports stakeholders
  1. Caroline F Finch
  1. Correspondence to Professor Caroline F Finch, Federation University Australia, Australian Centre for Research into Injury in Sport and its Prevention, SMB Campus, P. O. Box 663, Ballarat, VIC 3353, Australia; c.finch{at}federation.edu.au

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-097140

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    It is now widely recognised that it is important to involve a full range of stakeholders and other research end-users, from the outset when designing and implementing prevention programmes.1 ,2 As long ago as 2003, my team recognised that the views of those actively involved in sport should also be considered when setting research priorities.3 Findings from our survey of coaches and sports administrators have since informed the direction of much of our sports injury research over the following decade in community Australian Football. There will be similar examples from other sports, even if they have not been formally documented in the sports medicine literature.

    There is also increasing awareness that sports medicine research evidence is not being widely adopted within many sports settings, and this is limiting the effectiveness of interventions.4 The possible reasons for this are varied, but could include that the interventions and other evidence generated by researchers are not considered to be of enough importance to sport itself …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Twitter Follow Caroline Finch at @CarolineFinch

    • Funding The author is supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC Principal Research Fellowship ID: 1058737).

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.