Adopting common data elements (CDEs) for the National Trauma Research Repository (NTRR): the results of an outcome, outcome measures, and rehabilitation Delphi Survey

Introduction The National Trauma Research Repository (NTRR) serves as the central warehouse for trauma clinical research data that result from military and civilian trauma research. An effort to enhance the NTRR was undertaken through the identification and integration of common data elements (CDEs). CDEs will improve usability for primary investigators and allow for enhanced secondary analysis and combing of NTRR archived studies. A consensus-driven approach was used to review established data elements and recommend trauma basic CDEs for the outcomes and rehabilitation environments of care for inclusion in the NTRR data dictionary. Methods A multidisciplinary workgroup located and reviewed data dictionaries, codebooks, data collection forms, and published articles for outcome measurement instruments and individual outcome and rehabilitation data elements. Three rounds of a Delphi Survey were completed, and monthly meetings with the workgroup were conducted. Consensus during the Delphi Survey was identified with an 80% agreement threshold. Results Fifteen sources were reviewed for outcome measurement instruments, 39 measurement instruments were presented for consideration in the Delphi Survey, and 12 instruments (28%) reached consensus for inclusion in the NTRR data dictionary. Seventeen sources were reviewed for individual outcome data elements, 55 data elements were included in the Delphi Survey, and 45 data elements reached consensus for inclusion. Eleven sources were reviewed for rehabilitation data elements. Of the 41 rehabilitation data elements identified and included in the Delphi, 17 data elements reached consensus for inclusion. Discussion This workgroup selected outcome measurement instruments, outcome CDEs, and rehabilitation CDEs for inclusion in the NTRR data dictionary as basic CDEs. Next steps include disseminating these elements, integrating their use in trauma studies, and tracking the use and usability of these instruments and CDEs. Level of evidence VII.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open
Published
2026-07-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2025-002088
Primary Topic
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Adopting common data elements (CDEs) for the National Trauma Research Repository (NTRR): the results of an outcome, outcome measures, and rehabilitation Delphi Survey

John Chovanes, Ashley N Moreno, Juan P. Herrera‐Escobar, Ольга Волк et al.
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
article

Adopting common data elements (CDEs) for the National Trauma Research Repository (NTRR): the results of an outcome, outcome measures, and rehabilitation Delphi Survey

John Chovanes, Ashley N Moreno, Juan P. Herrera‐Escobar, Ольга Волк, Joseph T. Giacino, Karen Kowalske, Dagmar Amtmann, Kevin M. Schuster, Kirby R. Gross, Eric Elster, Jill Marie Cancio, Ingrid Parry, Jeffrey C Schneider, Adele Doperalski
article en

Abstract

Introduction The National Trauma Research Repository (NTRR) serves as the central warehouse for trauma clinical research data that result from military and civilian trauma research. An effort to enhance the NTRR was undertaken through the identification and integration of common data elements (CDEs). CDEs will improve usability for primary investigators and allow for enhanced secondary analysis and combing of NTRR archived studies. A consensus-driven approach was used to review established data elements and recommend trauma basic CDEs for the outcomes and rehabilitation environments of care for inclusion in the NTRR data dictionary. Methods A multidisciplinary workgroup located and reviewed data dictionaries, codebooks, data collection forms, and published articles for outcome measurement instruments and individual outcome and rehabilitation data elements. Three rounds of a Delphi Survey were completed, and monthly meetings with the workgroup were conducted. Consensus during the Delphi Survey was identified with an 80% agreement threshold. Results Fifteen sources were reviewed for outcome measurement instruments, 39 measurement instruments were presented for consideration in the Delphi Survey, and 12 instruments (28%) reached consensus for inclusion in the NTRR data dictionary. Seventeen sources were reviewed for individual outcome data elements, 55 data elements were included in the Delphi Survey, and 45 data elements reached consensus for inclusion. Eleven sources were reviewed for rehabilitation data elements. Of the 41 rehabilitation data elements identified and included in the Delphi, 17 data elements reached consensus for inclusion. Discussion This workgroup selected outcome measurement instruments, outcome CDEs, and rehabilitation CDEs for inclusion in the NTRR data dictionary as basic CDEs. Next steps include disseminating these elements, integrating their use in trauma studies, and tracking the use and usability of these instruments and CDEs. Level of evidence VII.

Trauma Surgery & Acute Care OpenVol. 11(Suppl 3)
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US), National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship (US), Harvard University (US), Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (US), University of Washington (US), Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital (US), Cooper University Hospital (US), Bridgeport Hospital (US), Yale University (US), Shriners Hospitals for Children - Northern California (US), National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (US), United States Army Institute of Surgical Research (US), Department of Public Health (MM), Cooper University Health Care (US), University of California, Davis (US), The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.