ArticleMilitary medicine2026
Embedding Lived Expertise into Military and Veteran Medical Research.
Article in Military medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Military and Veterans health research has substantially advanced in recent decades, particularly in terms of analytic sophistication aimed at characterizing the biopsychosocial complexity of health through biomarkers, neuroimaging, and predictive modeling. However, formal models (e.g., governance structures) for including individuals with lived experiences to guide this work have not evolved at the same pace. Drawing on our collective perspectives as Veterans, Caregivers, and academic partners, this commentary examines the structural limitations of current engagement processes. Although community advisory boards or similar mechanisms have become increasingly common, engagement often occurs after key design decisions have been established, limiting meaningful influence on investigative topics, hypothesis formation, confounder identification, endpoint prioritization, and analytic strategy. Caregivers, including those supporting service members with traumatic brain injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder, remain even less integrated, despite their critical role in long-term recovery. Here, we propose a Patient-Researcher model characterized by upstream integration, sustained engagement, and structured mentorship. Embedding individuals with lived experiences throughout the research process strengthens construct validity, improves translational relevance, and better aligns research with the realities of military and Veteran life.
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.