TY - JOUR
T1 - A survey of Delphi panelists after core outcome set development revealed positive feedback and methods to facilitate panel member participation
AU - Turnbull, Alison E.
AU - Dinglas, Victor D.
AU - Friedman, Lisa Aronson
AU - Chessare, Caroline M.
AU - Sepúlveda, Kristin A.
AU - Bingham, Clifton O.
AU - Needham, Dale M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/10
Y1 - 2018/10
N2 - Objectives: The objective of this study was to elicit feedback on consensus methodology used for core outcome set (COS) development. Study Design and Setting: An online survey of international Delphi panelists participating in a recent COS for clinical research studies evaluating acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors was conducted. Panelists represented 14 countries (56% outside the United States). Results: Seventy (92%) panelists completed the survey, including 32 researchers, 19 professional association representatives, 4 research funding representatives, and 15 ARF survivors/caregiver members. Among respondents, 91% reported that the time required to participate was appropriate and 96% were not bothered by reminders for timely response. Attributes of measurement instruments and voting results from previous rounds were evaluated differently across stakeholder groups. When measurement properties were explained in the stem of the survey question, 59 (84%) panelists (including 73% of survivors/families) correctly interpreted information about an instrument's reliability. Without a reminder in the stem, only 20 (29%) panelists (including 38% of researchers) correctly identified properties of a COS. Conclusion: This international Delphi panel, including >20% patients/caregivers, favorably reported on feasibility of the methodology. Providing all panelists pertinent information/reminders about the project's objective at each voting round is important to informed decision making across all stakeholder groups.
AB - Objectives: The objective of this study was to elicit feedback on consensus methodology used for core outcome set (COS) development. Study Design and Setting: An online survey of international Delphi panelists participating in a recent COS for clinical research studies evaluating acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors was conducted. Panelists represented 14 countries (56% outside the United States). Results: Seventy (92%) panelists completed the survey, including 32 researchers, 19 professional association representatives, 4 research funding representatives, and 15 ARF survivors/caregiver members. Among respondents, 91% reported that the time required to participate was appropriate and 96% were not bothered by reminders for timely response. Attributes of measurement instruments and voting results from previous rounds were evaluated differently across stakeholder groups. When measurement properties were explained in the stem of the survey question, 59 (84%) panelists (including 73% of survivors/families) correctly interpreted information about an instrument's reliability. Without a reminder in the stem, only 20 (29%) panelists (including 38% of researchers) correctly identified properties of a COS. Conclusion: This international Delphi panel, including >20% patients/caregivers, favorably reported on feasibility of the methodology. Providing all panelists pertinent information/reminders about the project's objective at each voting round is important to informed decision making across all stakeholder groups.
KW - Consensus methods
KW - Core outcome set development
KW - Delphi study
KW - Feedback strategies
KW - Stakeholders
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050177766&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050177766&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.06.007
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.06.007
M3 - Article
C2 - 29966731
AN - SCOPUS:85050177766
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 102
SP - 99
EP - 106
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
ER -