@article{c95beb4bf0d74a88b94f61d516388f74,
title = "Development of a research agenda for endovenous treatment of lower-extremity venous reflux: Proceedings from a multidisciplinary consensus panel",
abstract = "A multidisciplinary Venous Reflux Research Consensus Panel was convened to develop a prioritized research agenda for the use of endovenous techniques to treat lower-extremity VR. The Panel recommended establishment of a prospective registry with which to compare the long-term outcomes of surgical and endovenous methods of treating truncal reflux. Critical basic science initiatives were also identified that have strong potential to spur future advances in VR treatment.",
author = "Suresh Vedantham and Rundback, {John H.} and Khilnani, {Neil M.} and Peter Gloviczki and Andrews, {R. Torrance} and Sadick, {Neil S.} and Fan, {Chieh Min} and Meissner, {Mark H.} and Comerota, {Anthony J.} and Hume, {Keith M.} and Chrisman, {Howard B.} and Dusan Pavcnik and Kaufman, {John A.} and Min, {Robert J.}",
note = "Funding Information: The CAIRR was created by the SIR Foundation with specific goals, which include the identification of major interventional radiology research imperatives, enhancement of investigators' ability to obtain funding for interventional radiology research, and development of infrastructure resources to support the execution of pivotal clinical trials ( 5 ). The first step in the CAIRR process for any important research area is the creation of a multidisciplinary Research Consensus Panel to identify and prioritize those research projects that are pivotal, feasible, translational, innovative, and strategic. The work product of each Research Consensus Panel includes a White Paper summarizing the consensus strategic research agenda developed, an executive protocol summary for pivotal research study development, and a list of research priorities for guidance of Requests for Application within the SIR Foundation and external organizations. Two potential sources of bias in the current effort to define VR research priorities must be recognized. First, panelist selection strongly influenced the content of the discussion and the prioritization ranking of research topics. Second, the presence of redundancy in the original list of topic choices necessitated an aggregate data analysis that was susceptible to a degree of subjective bias. However, it is important to note that the topics prioritized highest by the Panel were also ranked highest by the governmental and industry representatives. Given this consistency, the Panel is convinced that the final rankings reported in this document accurately reflect the content and emphasis of the discussion and that they articulate a clear research direction for VR. ",
year = "2005",
month = dec,
doi = "10.1097/01.RVI.0000183869.53626.69",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "1575--1579",
journal = "Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology",
issn = "1051-0443",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "12",
}