TY - JOUR T1 - Divergence of military and civilian trauma research priorities JF - Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open JO - Trauma Surg Acute Care Open DO - 10.1136/tsaco-2021-000765 VL - 6 IS - 1 SP - e000765 AU - David Baer AU - Ross Donaldson AU - Todd McKinley AU - Robert Guldberg Y1 - 2021/06/01 UR - http://tsaco.bmj.com/content/6/1/e000765.abstract N2 - While overall trauma research and development funding has a long history of being woefully underfunded in comparison to its societal impact, one saving grace has been the longstanding synergy between military and civilian activities. The crucible of war and caring for those injured in combat has driven innovation in every area of trauma care, with numerous recent examples from Afghanistan and Iraq alone.1 From large-scale innovations such as medical evacuation, to individual devices such as hemostatic dressings, high-impact research, development and innovation has been spurred by military medical necessity, investment and use. This is captured in the adage that the only winner in war is medicine. Military innovations in trauma have spread widely to the civilian arena, where they are more carefully studied and further refined. While it is tempting to examine military medical innovation in the isolated context of military use, the beneficial back and forth between military and civilian trauma care is an essential, not optional, step to ensure maximum benefit to military casualties.2 The overlap between civilian and military trauma care and innovation has thus been of mutually reinforcing benefit.Many journals and publications have consistently and correctly identified the need for a civilian counterpart to the military’s investment in trauma care. Most recently articulated by Glass et al, … ER -