Research Consensus: n Defining Research Gaps and Priorities · 2014-09-04 · n Research Consensus:...

Mil

ita

ry P

erfo

rma

nce

Div

isio

n

Research Consensus:

Defining Research Gaps and Priorities

Edward J. Zambraski, Ph.D.

Jay R. Hydren, M.S.

US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA

This research (conference presentation) was supported by an appointment to the Knowledge Preservation Program and Student

Research Participation Program at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institution of Environmental Medicine administered by the

Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and

USAMRC.

The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the author(s) and are not to be construed as official or

reflecting the views of the Army or the Department of Defense.

Thursday Aug. 21st 2014

0800-0900

Select SLIDE MASTER to Insert Briefing Title Here

3-Sep-14 Name/Office Symbol/(703) XXX-XXX (DSN XXX) / email address

Purpose

• Identify various international research

efforts/interests.

• Identify areas where there are research gaps

• Reach a consensus on a prioritization for

critically needed research pertaining to

Soldiers’ Physical Performance

• Discuss some limiting factors concerning

conducting research

Military Performance Division Dr. Edward Zambraski [email protected] UNCLASSIFIED 21 AUG 2014

mailto:[email protected]



Approach

1. Survey sent to all meeting attendees

2. Demographic information on

respondents was obtained

3. Specific areas of research (n = 37) were

rated for their priority and importance

4. Additional questions about other areas

of research were provided





“Ground Rules”

1. Individuals were told that their responses represented their

“own opinions” and they were not to be construed as the

position of any military or government.

2. The goal is to determine if there is agreement, or a lack of

agreement, on what is considered to be critically needed,

high priority research.

3. The goal is NOT to make value judgments, or comparisons,

on the importance of any research being done that pertains

to Soldier Physical Performance. A low priority score does

not mean that the topic is not important. It could mean that

ample work and progress in that specific area has been

completed.





The Survey

Demographics

of Respondents

• Country

• Civilian or Military

• Branch

• Education Level

• Experience

Evaluating

Areas of Research

• 37 Research Topics Listed

• 1-5 Likert Scale

5. Highest possible priority

4. High priority

3. Moderate Priority

2. Low Priority

1. Unnecessary, do not consider

• Open Ended Questions

• Limitations to Research





Identified Research Topics for Ranking (N = 37)

1. Genetics (selection for performance, injury potential)

2. Epidemiology (characterizing individuals, tracking pertinent medical information,

injuries)

3. Cognitive function: Motivation

4. Cognitive function: Resilience

5. Endocrinological factors and performance

6. Measuring physical performance/fitness

7. Physical training programs: Strength

8. Physical training programs: Endurance

9. Physical training programs: High intensity programs

10. Sleep






11. Nutrition

12. Environmental factors: Heat

13. Environmental factors: Cold

14. Environmental factors: Altitude

15. Musculoskeletal injuries: Stress fractures

16. Musculoskeletal injuries: Acute injuries

17. Musculoskeletal injuries: Overuse injuries

18. Musculoskeletal injuries: Injury mitigation programs

19. Effects of deployment(s)






20. Supplements: Legal

21. Supplements: Illegal

22. Use of NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs)

23. Computational/predictive modeling of performance

24. Physical demands in training environments

25. Physical demands in operational environments

26. Performance of National Guard/Reserve Troops (leave blank if no NG/R):

27. Soldier load impairing performance

28. Soldier equipment impairing performance






29. Clinical research: Diagnosing injuries that impair performance:

30. Clinical research: Treatment of injuries that impair performance:

31. Clinical research: Basis for return to duty decisions:

32. Clinical research: Concussions

33. Male vs female performance

34. Gender integration within the military

35. Fitness of recruits

36. Body composition of recruits

37. Physical employment standards





Open Ended Questions

1. Of 37 areas listed, please choose and rank the top five (5) in

which your military/country is the most engaged and/or feels is the

most important.

2. Please list any other areas/topics pertaining to Soldier physical

performance that are not listed above, but you believe are

important.

3. What do you feel is the most important factor pertaining to Soldier

physical performance that needs to be addressed scientifically?

4. If your military/country is NOT addressing it, what is the reason?

5. Are you collaborating, or interesting in collaborating, with other

military/countries to address this major concern?





Survey Respondents (n=65)

Germany (1)

Australia (5)

USA (18)

France (3)

Finland (11)

UK (2)

Canada (3)

Estonia (1)

Denmark (2)

Israel (2)

Australia (2)

Norway (3)

Sweden (3)

South Africa (2)

Netherlands (1)

Brazil (3)

New Zealand (1)

Singapore (2)

Switzerland (1)

Scotland (1)

Countries Branches


54.3%

2.2%

8.7%

34.8%

Army Navy Air Force Other




26.2%

73.8%

Military Civilian

74%

26%

Yes No

Military or Civilian Association with a

military organization?






Years of Experience

15.3±9.9 yrs (1-40)

85.9%

6.3%

1.6% 6.3%

Scientist/researcher

Administrator

Clinician

Soldier/Airman/Sailor

Student

Education Job Position



3.1%

39.1%

53.1%

4.7%

College (BS, BA)

Graduate degree (MS, MA)

Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, ScD)

MD




Summary of Respondents

Majority

• Civilian

• Army

• Advanced Degrees

Represented

• 20 Different Countries

Experience

• Scientists/ Researchers

• > 15 years of Experience





Additional Research Topics Cited

1. Physiological sensors

2. Determinants of physical activity

participation - simply getting

soldiers active

3. Link between physical

performance and cognition-

behavior.

4. Rehabilitation

5. Military Skill-Acquisition,

Training pedagogy and didactics

6. Fitness and cognitive/

marksmanship interaction

7. SF soldier and physical demands

8. Fatigue

9. Enhancing of recovery of soldiers

during training and operation

10. Hypertrophy and mass gain

11. Benefits(or risk) of individual

Soldier equipment used for

primary prevention, e.g. insoles.

12. Association of physical

activity/fitness with

learning/academic achievement

13. Behavior modification for fitness/

active lifestyle

14. Post Traumatic Stress

15. Recruit Identification

16. Periodization





Inputs Used to Rank Top Priorities

Highest Priority for

Needed Physical Performance Research

Mean Score of Listed Topics

Topics Receiving Greatest # of “5’s”

Individual Statement “The Most Important”

Individual Ranking of Top 5 Topics





Mean Scores for Listed Topics

Rank Topic Score

1 Physical demands in operational environments 4.32

2 Physical training programs: High intensity programs 4.20

3 Measuring physical performance/fitness 4.15

4 Physical training programs: Strength 4.13

5 Musculoskeletal injuries: Injury mitigation programs 4.12

6 Musculoskeletal injuries: Overuse injuries 4.09

7 Physical employment standards 4.06

8 Soldier load impairing performance 4.04

9 Physical training programs: Endurance 4.02

10 Physical demands in training environments 4.00





Mean Scores for Listed Topics

Rank Topic Score

11 Nutrition 3.93

12 Soldier equipment impairing performance 3.92

13 Fitness of recruits 3.85

14 Sleep 3.79

15 Effects of deployment(s) 3.76

16 Environmental factors: Heat 3.72

17 Musculoskeletal injuries: Stress fractures 3.72

18 Epidemiology (characterizing individuals, tracking

pertinent medical information, injuries): 3.69

19 Cognitive function: Resilience 3.68

20 Musculoskeletal injuries: Acute injuries 3.62





Topics Receiving

Greatest Number of “5”

Rank Topic Number of

“5’s”

1 Physical demands in operational environments 26

2 Physical training programs: High intensity programs 23

3 Physical training programs: Strength 22

4 Measuring physical performance/fitness 20

5 Physical training programs: Endurance 19

6 Physical employment standards 18

7 Physical demands in training environments 18

8 Musculoskeletal injuries: Injury mitigation programs 17





Individual Rankings

of Top 5 Topics

Rank Topic Score



3 Fitness of recruits 44

4 Physical demands in training environments 43






Suggested Most Important


Rank Topic Score




4 Measuring physical performance/fitness 4

5 Periodization 4




Summary of Rankings


Rank Topic

1 Physical demands in operational environments

2 Physical employment standards

3 Measuring physical performance/fitness

4 Musculoskeletal injuries: Injury mitigation programs

5 Physical training programs: Strength/Periodization

6 Physical training programs: High intensity programs

7 Physical demands in training environments

8 Musculoskeletal injuries: Overuse injuries

9 Physical training programs: Endurance

10 Fitness of recruits




Questions ?


• Is this list of topics, and the rating and evaluation

that has been used, reasonable in terms of capturing

or identifying research priority needs?

• Does anyone have a research priority/need that they

feel has been missed or not identified; one that they

feel is “extremely important/urgent”?

• For the top 3-5 topics/areas that have been

identified, does the group think that these are

being adequately addressed?



3-Sep-14 Name/Office Symbol/(703) XXX-XXX (DSN XXX) / email address Military Performance Division Dr. Edward Zambraski [email protected] UNCLASSIFIED 21 APR 2014

Unexpected Results

Rank Topic Percentage

1 Supplements: Illegal 44%

2 Use of NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) 37%

3 Computational/predictive modeling of performance 35%

4 Genetics (selection for performance, injury potential) 30%

5 Clinical research: Concussions 26%

6 Gender integration within the military 24%

7 Endocrinological factors and performance 22%

8 Body composition of recruits 20%

Topics had > 20 percent of respondents rate as:

Unnecessary or Low Priority ( 1 or 2 )




Limitations to Research

1. Scientific Expertise

2. Funding

3. Other Priorities

4. Access to Research Volunteers (Active Military)

5. Complexity of Human Use Regulations/Requirements 1. Within and across services / countries

6. Technology Limitations 1. Non-invasive measurements

2. Measurements overtime / in the field





If your military is not addressing your most

important research problem, why?

N/A, 35.8%

Lack of scientific expertise,

9.4%

Lack of funding, 24.5%

Other higher priorities,

30.2%





Collaborations

Are you collaborating, or interesting in collaborating, with other

military/countries to address this major concern?

ANSWER: 100 % “YES”

Motivation for Collaborations: Should not just be for resources

If you do not have resources a country/military should not be

hesitant to approach others about collaborating. You may have

unique “assets” that would make a collaboration extremely

attractive.

-access to Soldiers

-military environment (training bases)

-special populations (recruits/females/specific MOSs)

-being a relatively small military

-unique facilities, equipment, testing procedures, data





Take Home Messages

1. This was NOT a systematic, comprehensive research study or

survey.

2. Respondents represented the highest level of expertise and

experience of scientists working in the area of “physical

performance”.

3. There appears to be a consensus on the importance of a key

number of topics or areas, but whether these are “gaps” is

unclear.

1. Physical Employment Standards

2. Physical Demands in the Operational Setting

3. Musculoskeletal Injuries

4. Physical Training Programs

5. Measuring fitness



Mil

ita

ry P

erfo

rma

nce

Div

isio

n

Research Consensus:

Defining Research Gaps and Priorities

Edward J. Zambraski, Ph.D.

Jay R. Hydren, M.S.

US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA

[email protected]

Thursday Aug. 21st 2014

0800-0900

Research Consensus: n Defining Research Gaps and Priorities · 2014-09-04 · n Research Consensus:...

Documents

Transcript of Research Consensus: n Defining Research Gaps and Priorities · 2014-09-04 · n Research Consensus:...