4.6 Article

An application example of translational science in disaster medicine: From grant to deliverables

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103518

关键词

Translational science; Disaster medicine; Triage; Pre-hospital processes; Life support and damage control interventions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 recognizes the importance of increasing resilience to disasters, which is the aim of the NIGHTINGALE project funded by Horizon 2020. The project aims to support the preparedness of first responders during sudden onset disasters and mass casualty incidents through an innovative toolkit. This manuscript describes the translational science methodology adopted for the development of the NIGHTINGALE toolkit, showing its potential to translate grant requirements into evidence-based tools and guidelines.
The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 recognizes the importance of in-creasing resilience to disasters, a target that the Horizon 2020 funded project Novel Integrated Toolkit for Enhanced Pre-Hospital Life Support and Triage in Challenging and Large Emergencies (NIGHTINGALE) is aiming to achieve by supporting the preparedness of first responders during sudden onset disasters (SODs) and related mass casualty incidents (MCIs) through an innovative toolkit featuring different technological solutions. This manuscript aims to describe the transla-tional science (TS) methodology adopted to guide the development of the NIGHTINGALE toolkit. The multi-stage process featured three different scoping reviews, three Modified Delphi studies and subsequent translation of consensus statements into evidence-based tools and guidelines on triage, prehospital life support and damage control interventions, and prehospital processes dur-ing SODs and MCIs. This manuscript shows the potential of the TS methodology to translate grant requirements into deliverables based on scientific evidence and a sound research approach.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据