The Bone &
Joint Journal provides
the latest evidence to guide the clinical practice of orthopaedic
surgeons. The benefits of one intervention compared with another
are presented using outcome measures; some may be specific to a
limb or joint and some are more general health-related quality of
life measures. Readers will be familiar with many of these outcome
measures and will be able to judge the relative benefits of different interventions
when measured using the same outcome tool; for example, different treatments
for pain in the knee measured using a particular knee score. But,
how should readers compare outcomes between different clinical areas
using different outcome measures? This article explores the use
of standardised
Cite this article:
In 2017, the British Society for Children’s Orthopaedic Surgery engaged the profession and all relevant stakeholders in two formal research prioritization processes. In this editorial, we describe the impact of this prioritization on funding, and how research in children’s orthopaedics, which was until very recently a largely unfunded and under-investigated area, is now flourishing. Establishing research priorities was a crucial step in this process. Cite this article:
