ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2025
'We're All (Cauliflower) Ears': A Delphi Study Including Staff and Players to Co-Construct Sports Science and Medicine (Performance and Wellbeing) Research Priorities for Premiership Rugby.
Article in European journal of sport science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance and Wellbeing Research Priorities in Premiership Women's Rugby: A Delphi Study Including Players and Staff.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sports invest in research to optimise performance and enhance athlete wellbeing. Involving stakeholders allows research priorities to be determined, maximising the adoption and relevance of research findings. A three-round modified Delphi process was used to establish wellbeing and performance research priorities for Premiership Rugby (Professional men's rugby union competition in England). Up to 10 research priorities were provided during Round 1 (grouped into higher-order categories and themes via content analysis). In Rounds 2 and 3, participants ranked higher-order categories on a one to five Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement. Sixty-five participants responded in Round 1 (41 and 32 in Rounds 2 and 3). Staff and player experience of working or playing in the Premiership was 11.0 (4.5-16.5) and 7.0 (6.0-8.5) years. Following Round 1, 393 research priorities were provided and 53 higher-order research priorities and 26 categories were identified, within three themes: performance, wellbeing and injury. Following Round 3, 21 research priorities reached consensus within performance (n = 7), wellbeing (n = 6) and injury (n = 8). Research priorities for a professional sports league, were established by the application of a pragmatic research lens, to ensure priorities were practically minded and also developed with minimal resource requirements, minimal burden for participants and in a short amount of time, which can be applied in other leagues. Research priorities deemed feasible and lacking a relevant evidence base can be addressed in future studies to maximise impact and compliment the ongoing research programmes already established by the professional league and governing body.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.