确定环境因素研究和基于力的操纵方面的优先差距。国际跨学科德尔菲研究。

IF 1.6 Q2 REHABILITATION Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-12 DOI:10.1080/10669817.2023.2255820
David Griswold, Ken Learman, Giacomo Rossettini, Alvisa Palese, Edmund Ickert, Mark Wilhelm, Chad Cook, Jennifer Bent
{"title":"确定环境因素研究和基于力的操纵方面的优先差距。国际跨学科德尔菲研究。","authors":"David Griswold, Ken Learman, Giacomo Rossettini, Alvisa Palese, Edmund Ickert, Mark Wilhelm, Chad Cook, Jennifer Bent","doi":"10.1080/10669817.2023.2255820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To establish priority gaps related to contextual factors (CFs) research and force-based manipulation (FBM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-round Delphi following recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES) involving international and interdisciplinary panelists with expertise in CFs and FBM. Round 1 was structured around two prompting questions created by the workgroup. Ranking of each priority gap was done by calculating composite scores for each theme generated. Consensus threshold was set with an agreement ≥75% among panelists. Median and interquartile range were calculated for each priority gap to provide the central tendency of responses. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to evaluate the consistency and stability of responses between rounds 2 and 3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-six panelists participated in all three rounds of the Delphi. Consensus was reached for 16 of 19 generated themes for priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The ranking of each identified gap was computed and presented. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was non-significant (<i>P</i> > .05), demonstrating consistency and stability of results between rounds.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The result of this Delphi provides international and interdisciplinary consensus-based priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The gaps identified can be used to generate future research inquiries involving CFs research and FBM.</p>","PeriodicalId":47319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"118-126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10795597/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying priority gaps in contextual factors research and force-based manipulation. An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"David Griswold, Ken Learman, Giacomo Rossettini, Alvisa Palese, Edmund Ickert, Mark Wilhelm, Chad Cook, Jennifer Bent\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10669817.2023.2255820\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To establish priority gaps related to contextual factors (CFs) research and force-based manipulation (FBM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-round Delphi following recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES) involving international and interdisciplinary panelists with expertise in CFs and FBM. Round 1 was structured around two prompting questions created by the workgroup. Ranking of each priority gap was done by calculating composite scores for each theme generated. Consensus threshold was set with an agreement ≥75% among panelists. Median and interquartile range were calculated for each priority gap to provide the central tendency of responses. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to evaluate the consistency and stability of responses between rounds 2 and 3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-six panelists participated in all three rounds of the Delphi. Consensus was reached for 16 of 19 generated themes for priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The ranking of each identified gap was computed and presented. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was non-significant (<i>P</i> > .05), demonstrating consistency and stability of results between rounds.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The result of this Delphi provides international and interdisciplinary consensus-based priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The gaps identified can be used to generate future research inquiries involving CFs research and FBM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"118-126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10795597/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2023.2255820\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2023.2255820","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定与环境因素(CFs)研究和基于力的操作(FBM)相关的优先差距:确定与环境因素(CFs)研究和基于力的操控(FBM)相关的优先差距:方法:按照德尔菲研究的实施和报告推荐准则(CREDES),由具有情境因素和基于力的操控(FBM)专业知识的国际跨学科小组成员参与,进行了三轮德尔菲研究。第一轮围绕工作组提出的两个提示性问题展开。通过计算产生的每个主题的综合分数,对每个优先差距进行排序。共识阈值设定为小组成员之间的一致率≥75%。计算每个优先级差距的中位数和四分位数间距,以提供答复的中心倾向。使用 Wilcoxon 秩和检验来评估第二轮和第三轮答复的一致性和稳定性:46 位专家组成员参加了德尔菲法的所有三轮讨论。在产生的 19 个主题中,有 16 个就 CFs 研究和基于结果的管理方面的优先差距达成了共识。计算并展示了每个已确定差距的排序。Wilcoxon 秩和检验结果不显著(P > .05),表明各轮结果具有一致性和稳定性:德尔菲法的结果为 CFs 研究和 FBM 提供了基于国际和跨学科共识的优先差距。所确定的差距可用于未来涉及 CFs 研究和成果管理制的研究调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Identifying priority gaps in contextual factors research and force-based manipulation. An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study.

Objective: To establish priority gaps related to contextual factors (CFs) research and force-based manipulation (FBM).

Methods: A three-round Delphi following recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES) involving international and interdisciplinary panelists with expertise in CFs and FBM. Round 1 was structured around two prompting questions created by the workgroup. Ranking of each priority gap was done by calculating composite scores for each theme generated. Consensus threshold was set with an agreement ≥75% among panelists. Median and interquartile range were calculated for each priority gap to provide the central tendency of responses. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to evaluate the consistency and stability of responses between rounds 2 and 3.

Results: Forty-six panelists participated in all three rounds of the Delphi. Consensus was reached for 16 of 19 generated themes for priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The ranking of each identified gap was computed and presented. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was non-significant (P > .05), demonstrating consistency and stability of results between rounds.

Conclusion: The result of this Delphi provides international and interdisciplinary consensus-based priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The gaps identified can be used to generate future research inquiries involving CFs research and FBM.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the publication of original research, case reports, and reviews of the literature that contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of manual therapy, clinical research, therapeutic practice, and academic training. In addition, each issue features an editorial written by the editor or a guest editor, media reviews, thesis reviews, and abstracts of current literature. Areas of interest include: •Thrust and non-thrust manipulation •Neurodynamic assessment and treatment •Diagnostic accuracy and classification •Manual therapy-related interventions •Clinical decision-making processes •Understanding clinimetrics for the clinician
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of manual therapy for sacroiliac joint pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Recognition of a patient with neck autonomic dysfunction: findings from a rare case report of harlequin syndrome in direct access physiotherapy. Autonomic nervous system and endocrine system response to upper or lower cervical spine mobilization in males with persistent post-concussion symptoms: a proof-of-concept trial. Management of concussion symptoms utilizing Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy: a case series. Differences in physical examination findings between those who present with or without headache soon after a whiplash injury: a cross-sectional study.
×
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