Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness.

Prashant Nasa, Ravi Jain, Deven Juneja
{"title":"Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness.","authors":"Prashant Nasa,&nbsp;Ravi Jain,&nbsp;Deven Juneja","doi":"10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.</p>","PeriodicalId":23729,"journal":{"name":"World journal of methodology","volume":"11 4","pages":"116-129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/92/4a/WJM-11-116.PMC8299905.pdf","citationCount":"192","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World journal of methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 192

Abstract

The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
德尔菲法在卫生保健研究中的适用性。
德尔菲技术是利用小组成员的集体意见进行预测的系统过程。采用德尔菲方法在小组成员中形成共识的结构化方法已在不同的医学领域得到接受。在过去的几十年里,德尔菲方法发挥了关键作用,在研究有限、伦理/逻辑困难或证据相互矛盾的情况下,利用集体智慧开发最佳实践指导。然而,评估德尔菲研究质量标准的尝试报告了显著的差异,随后的过程的细节通常是不清楚的。我们推荐系统的质量工具来评价德尔菲法;确定研究的问题领域,选择小组,小组成员的匿名性,控制反馈,迭代德尔菲回合,共识标准,共识分析,结束标准,结果的稳定性。基于这9个定性评价点,对2019冠状病毒病相关医学领域德尔菲研究的质量进行评价。在报告德尔菲法的关键要素方面存在不一致,如确定小组成员、确定共识、结束轮询标准和提出结果。我们为研究人员、医学期刊编委会和审稿人提出评估点,以评估德尔菲方法在医疗保健研究中的质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sequential extraction of RNA, DNA and protein from cultured cells of the same group Crohn's disease and clinical management today: How it does? Assessing the readability of online information about jones fracture Adult eosinophilic esophagitis and advances in its treatment. Epidemiological trends in acute pancreatitis: A retrospective cohort in a tertiary center over a seven year period.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1