The Role of Registries in Neurotrauma Research: Translating Data into Health Policy That Enhances Patient Care; Comment on “Neurotrauma Surveillance in National Registries of Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review and Comparative Analysis of Data Dictionaries”

Document Type : Commentary


1 Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

2 Neuroscience Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

3 Division of Neurosurgery, Philippine General Hospital, University of the Philippines Manila, Manila, Philippines

4 Department of Neurosurgery, ASST Ospedale Maggiore Niguarda, Milano, Italy


The paucity of robust neurotrauma data is felt most in regions that experience a higher burden of traumatic brain injury (TBI). The scoping review done by Barthélemy et al. provides insight into the current state of national registries in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) while also exploring the tools required to standardize data collection. In this commentary, we reflect on the barriers to data collection (i.e., creation and maintenance of a TBI registry) and explore how registries can aid both scientific output and preventative public awareness campaigns that may pave the way to improved health policy and social change that avert mortality and morbidity from TBI.


  1. Horton, R., GBD 2010: understanding disease, injury, and risk. Lancet, 2012. 380(9859): p. 2053-4.
  2. Shumba CS, Lusambili AM. Not enough traction: Barriers that aspiring researchers from low- and middle-income countries face in global health research. Journal of Global Health Economics and Policy. 2021;1:e2021002. doi:10.52872/001c.25802
  3. Barthelemy, E.J., et al., Neurotrauma Surveillance in National Registries of Low-and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review and Comparative Analysis of Data Dictionaries. Int J Health Policy Manag, 2021.
  4. Corley, J., et al., Comprehensive Policy Recommendations for Head and Spine Injury Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. World Neurosurg, 2019. 132: p. 434-436.
  5. Dewan, M.C., et al., Global neurosurgery: the current capacity and deficit in the provision of essential neurosurgical care. Executive Summary of the Global Neurosurgery Initiative at the Program in Global Surgery and Social Change. J Neurosurg, 2018: p. 1-10.
  6. Trotter, J.P., Patient registries: a new gold standard for "real world" research. Ochsner J, 2002. 4(4): p. 211-4.
  7. Garcia, P.J., Global burden of injuries: it is time to understand the data in order to intervene. Inj Prev, 2020. 26(Supp 1): p. i1-i2.
  8. M Selveindran, S., et al., Mapping global evidence on strategies and interventions in neurotrauma and road traffic collisions prevention: a scoping review. Systematic Reviews, 2020. 9(1): p. 114.
  9. Rosenkrantz, L., et al., Understanding the barriers and facilitators to trauma registry development in resource-constrained settings: A survey of trauma registry stewards and researchers. Injury, 2021. 52(8): p. 2215-2224.
  10. J., K., Leading Change. 2012: New York: Harvard Business School Press.
  11. Grant, C.L., et al., Improved documentation following the implementation of a trauma registry: A means of sustainability for trauma registries in low- and middle-income countries. Injury, 2021. 52(9): p. 2672-2676.
  12. Hawkins B, P.J., The good governanceof evidence in health policy. Evid Policy, 2015. 12(4).
  13. Gaventa J, Finding the spaces for change: a power analysis. IDS Bull. 2006;37(6):23-33.
  14. Kickbusch, I. and A. Liu, Global health diplomacy—reconstructing power and governance. The Lancet, 2022. 399(10341): p. 2156-2166.
  15. 15. Rosseau, G., et al., Global neurosurgery: continued momentum at the 72nd World Health Assembly. J Neurosurg, 2020. 132(4): p. 1256-1260.

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 21 January 2023
  • Receive Date: 08 July 2022
  • Revise Date: 17 January 2023
  • Accept Date: 18 January 2023
  • First Publish Date: 21 January 2023