Saskia Jünger1,2, Sheila A Payne3, Jenny Brine4, Lukas Radbruch5,6, Sarah G Brearley3. 1. 1 Institute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 2. 6 Research Unit Ethics, University Hospital Cologne, 50923 Cologne, Germany. 3. 2 International Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. 4. 3 Lancaster University Library, Academic Services, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. 5. 4 Klinik und Poliklinik für Palliativmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Germany. 6. 5 Zentrum für Palliativmedizin, Malteser Krankenhaus Seliger Gerhard Bonn/Rhein-Sieg, Bonn, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Delphi technique is widely used for the development of guidance in palliative care, having impact on decisions with relevance for patient care. AIM: To systematically examine the application of the Delphi technique for the development of best practice guidelines in palliative care. DESIGN: A methodological systematic review was undertaken using the databases PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete and EMBASE. DATA SOURCES: Original articles (English language) were included when reporting on empirical studies that had used the Delphi technique to develop guidance for good clinical practice in palliative care. Data extraction included a quality appraisal on the rigour in conduct of the studies and the quality of reporting. RESULTS: A total of 30 empirical studies (1997-2015) were considered for full-text analysis. Considerable differences were identified regarding the rigour of the design and the reporting of essential process and outcome parameters. Furthermore, discrepancies regarding the use of terms for describing the method were observed, for example, concerning the understanding of a 'round' or a 'modified Delphi study'. CONCLUSION: Substantial variation was found concerning the quality of the study conduct and the transparency of reporting of Delphi studies used for the development of best practice guidance in palliative care. Since credibility of the resulting recommendations depends on the rigorous use of the Delphi technique, there is a need for consistency and quality both in the conduct and reporting of studies. To allow a critical appraisal of the methodology and the resulting guidance, a reporting standard for Conducting and REporting of DElphi Studies (CREDES) is proposed.
BACKGROUND: The Delphi technique is widely used for the development of guidance in palliative care, having impact on decisions with relevance for patient care. AIM: To systematically examine the application of the Delphi technique for the development of best practice guidelines in palliative care. DESIGN: A methodological systematic review was undertaken using the databases PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete and EMBASE. DATA SOURCES: Original articles (English language) were included when reporting on empirical studies that had used the Delphi technique to develop guidance for good clinical practice in palliative care. Data extraction included a quality appraisal on the rigour in conduct of the studies and the quality of reporting. RESULTS: A total of 30 empirical studies (1997-2015) were considered for full-text analysis. Considerable differences were identified regarding the rigour of the design and the reporting of essential process and outcome parameters. Furthermore, discrepancies regarding the use of terms for describing the method were observed, for example, concerning the understanding of a 'round' or a 'modified Delphi study'. CONCLUSION: Substantial variation was found concerning the quality of the study conduct and the transparency of reporting of Delphi studies used for the development of best practice guidance in palliative care. Since credibility of the resulting recommendations depends on the rigorous use of the Delphi technique, there is a need for consistency and quality both in the conduct and reporting of studies. To allow a critical appraisal of the methodology and the resulting guidance, a reporting standard for Conducting and REporting of DElphi Studies (CREDES) is proposed.
Entities:
Keywords:
Delphi technique; methodological systematic review; palliative care; reporting standard
Authors: Jeannie L Callum; Calvin H Yeh; Andrew Petrosoniak; Mark J McVey; Stephanie Cope; Troy Thompson; Victoria Chin; Keyvan Karkouti; Avery B Nathens; Kimmo Murto; Suzanne Beno; Jacob Pendergrast; Andrew McDonald; Russell MacDonald; Neill K J Adhikari; Asim Alam; Donald Arnold; Lee Barratt; Andrew Beckett; Sue Brenneman; Hina Razzaq Chaudhry; Allison Collins; Margaret Harvey; Jacinthe Lampron; Clarita Margarido; Amanda McFarlan; Barto Nascimento; Wendy Owens; Menaka Pai; Sandro Rizoli; Theodora Ruijs; Robert Skeate; Teresa Skelton; Michelle Sholzberg; Kelly Syer; Jami-Lynn Viveiros; Josee Theriault; Alan Tinmouth; Rardi Van Heest; Susan White; Michelle Zeller; Katerina Pavenski Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2019-09-03
Authors: Dmitry Khodyakov; Sean Grant; Brian Denger; Kathi Kinnett; Ann Martin; Marika Booth; Courtney Armstrong; Emily Dao; Christine Chen; Ian Coulter; Holly Peay; Glen Hazlewood; Natalie Street Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Amanda P Bettencourt; Kathleen S Romanowski; Victor Joe; James Jeng; Jeffrey E Carter; Robert Cartotto; Christopher K Craig; Renata Fabia; Gary A Vercruysse; William L Hickerson; Yuk Liu; Colleen M Ryan; John T Schulz Journal: J Burn Care Res Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 1.845
Authors: S Aloraibi; J Gladman; D Godfrey; V Booth; K Robinson; E Lunt; A Caswell; M Kerr; B Ollivere; A L Gordon Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Jessica D Veldhuizen; Anne O E van den Bulck; Arianne M J Elissen; Misja C Mikkers; Marieke J Schuurmans; Nienke Bleijenberg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 3.240