TY  - JOUR
AU  - Eberman, Lindsey E.
A2  - Eberman, Lindsey E.
A2  - Walker, Stacy E.
A2  - Floyd, Robert T.
A2  - Covassin, Tracey
A2  - Nolton, Esther
A2  - Snyder Valier, Alison R.
A2  - Phan, Kelvin
A2  - Weiss, Leigh
A2  - Earl-Boehm, Jennifer
DB  - BISp
DP  - BISp
KW  - Beratung, sportmedizinische
KW  - Beruf
KW  - Berufsbild
KW  - Betreuung, sportmedizinische
KW  - Forschung, empirische
KW  - Sportmedizin
KW  - Sportphysiotherapie
KW  - Trainerarbeit
LA  - eng
TI  - The prioritized research agenda for the athletic training profession : a report from the Strategic Alliance Research Agenda Task Force
TT  - Die priorisierte Forschungsagenda für den Beruf des "Athletic Trainers" : ein Bericht der "Strategic Alliance Research Agenda Task Force"
PY  - 2019
N2  - Context: Athletic trainers (ATs) must be equipped with evidence to inform their clinical practice. A systematic, inclusive, and continuous process for exploring research priorities is vital to the success of ATs and, more importantly, their patients' positive outcomes. Objective: To identify research priorities and unify research with clinical practice to improve patient care and advance the profession. Design: Mixed-methods study. Setting: Focus groups and a Web-based survey. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 87 ATs (43 men [49.4%], 44 women [50.6%]; age = 40 ± 11 years; experience = 18 ± 11 years) participated in focus groups. Of the 49 332 e-mails sent, 580 were undeliverable, 5131 ATs started the survey (access rate = 10.5%), and 4514 agreed to participate (response rate = 9.3%). Main Outcome Measure(s): Our study consisted of 6 focus-group sessions, a content-expert review, and a Web-based survey. Themes from the focus groups were used to develop the research priorities and survey instrument. We used the 25-item validated survey to determine whether the research priorities and findings of the focus groups were generalizable. Endorsement of research priorities and recommendations was achieved when respondents indicated they agreed or strongly agreed. Results: Respondents endorsed 5 research priorities: health care competency (n = 4438/4493, 98.8%), vitality of the profession (n = 4319/4455, 96.9%), health professions education (n = 3966/4419, 89.8%), health care economics (n = 4246/4425, 96.0%), and health information technology (n = 3893/4438, 87.7%). We also made the following recommendations: (1) develop funding initiatives that align with the agenda, (2) develop postdoctoral fellowships focused on clinical research, (3) facilitate collaborative relationships between clinicians and researchers, and (4) make research evidence more readily available and more applicable. Conclusions: Using a systematic and inclusive process, we developed a prioritized research agenda for the athletic training profession. The agenda was endorsed by the leaders of each Strategic Alliance organization and adopted as the Athletic Training Research Agenda.
L2  - https://dx.doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-374-18
DO  - 10.4085/1062-6050-374-18
SP  - S. 237-244
SN  - 1062-6050
JO  - Journal of athletic training
IS  - 3
VL  - 54
M3  - Elektronische Ressource (online)
M3  - Gedruckte Ressource
ID  - PU201905003503
ER  -