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}
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.
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