Display options
Share it on

BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2021 May 26;7(2):e001009. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2020-001009. eCollection 2021.

Rethinking innovation and the role of stakeholder engagement in sport and exercise medicine.

BMJ open sport & exercise medicine

Sharief Hendricks

Affiliations

  1. Division of Exercise Science and Sports Medicine, Department of Human Biology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa.
  2. Carnegie Applied Rugby Research (CARR) centre, Institute for Sport, Physical Actvity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
  3. Health, Physical Activity, Lifestyle and Sport Research Centre, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

PMID: 34123408 PMCID: PMC8160180 DOI: 10.1136/bmjsem-2020-001009

Abstract

In sport and exercise medicine, increasing pressure to improve athlete health outcomes and performance with limited resources has prompted an emphasis on innovation. A key component to innovation is stakeholder participation and engagement, that is, the involvement of those affected by the outcomes, such as end users and actors (the person(s) performing the required actions/behaviour change), of the research process. Several research frameworks in sport and exercise medicine highly recommend stakeholder engagement as part of the research process. There are, however, different levels to how engaged a stakeholder can be in a research project, and this level of engagement may be dependent on the researchers' goals. Stakeholder engagement can be organised on a continuum based on the stakeholder's relationship to the research and how involved they are in the project's decision-making process. This continuum can be used as a rating scale to evaluate and monitor the degree of perceived stakeholder participation in a research project. There are different paths to innovation in research, which are interlinked, and ideas and knowledge flow between them. Considering the continuum of stakeholder engagement and paths to innovation, this article highlights how different research types require different degrees of stakeholder engagement.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Keywords: knowledge translation; research; sports medicine

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

  1. Br J Sports Med. 2014 Apr;48(8):698-701 - PubMed
  2. Health Policy Plan. 2001 Sep;16(3):221-30 - PubMed
  3. Healthc (Amst). 2018 Sep;6(3):191-196 - PubMed
  4. Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Sep;10(5):314-336 - PubMed
  5. Am J Med Qual. 2008 Sep-Oct;23(5):382-8 - PubMed
  6. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2016 Oct 31;2(1):e000168 - PubMed
  7. Soc Sci Med. 1988;26(9):931-40 - PubMed
  8. Soc Sci Med. 2010 Sep;71(6):1102-9 - PubMed
  9. Acta Trop. 1996 Apr;61(2):79-92 - PubMed
  10. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2020 Nov 13;6(1):e000974 - PubMed
  11. Br J Sports Med. 2020 Aug 3;: - PubMed
  12. Br J Sports Med. 2019 Jul;53(13):791-793 - PubMed
  13. Br J Sports Med. 2011 Sep;45(12):949-51 - PubMed
  14. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Dec;52(24):1547-1548 - PubMed

Publication Types