Literature DB >> 33588938

Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial.

Fiona A Quirke1,2,3, Patricia Healy4,5, Elaine Ní Bhraonáin6, Mandy Daly7, Linda Biesty4,5,8, Tim Hurley9,10, Karen Walker11, Shireen Meher12, David M Haas13, Frank H Bloomfield14, Jamie J Kirkham15, Eleanor J Molloy10,16, Declan Devane17,4,5,18,19.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Delphi method is used in a wide variety of settings as a method of building consensus on important issues. Traditionally, the Delphi method uses multiple rounds of a survey to allow for feedback of other participants' survey responses in between rounds. By informing participants about how others answer a question or prioritise specific topics, it allows for diverse opinions to inform the consensus process. For this reason, the Delphi method is popular as a consensus building approach in developing core outcome sets (COS), i.e. the minimum agreed set of standardised outcomes that should be measured and reported in studies on a specific health condition. In a COS setting, participants prioritise the importance of outcomes for inclusion in a COS. This usually involves participating in multiple rounds of a survey that can span several weeks or months. Challenges with participant retention have been highlighted in previous COS. We will compare a three-round with a Real-Time Delphi approach on prioritised outcomes. This trial is embedded within the COHESION study which is developing a COS for interventions treating neonatal encephalopathy.
METHODS: One hundred and eighty stakeholders (parents/caregivers of infants diagnosed and treated with neonatal encephalopathy, healthcare providers and researchers) will be randomised using stratified randomisation to take part in either the Multi-Round or Real-Time Delphi. Stakeholders will rate the importance of the same set of outcomes in both arms. We will compare the prioritised outcomes at the end of both surveys as well as other parameters such as feedback, initial condition and iteration effects. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence to inform decisions on the use of Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi survey methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04471103 . Registered on 14 July 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Core outcome sets; Methodology; Multi-Round Delphi; Randomised trial; Real-Time Delphi

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33588938      PMCID: PMC7885346          DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05074-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trials        ISSN: 1745-6215            Impact factor:   2.279


  6 in total

1.  Using the Delphi method to engage stakeholders: a comparison of two studies.

Authors:  Monica R Geist
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2009-06-21

Review 2.  The COMET Handbook: version 1.0.

Authors:  Paula R Williamson; Douglas G Altman; Heather Bagley; Karen L Barnes; Jane M Blazeby; Sara T Brookes; Mike Clarke; Elizabeth Gargon; Sarah Gorst; Nicola Harman; Jamie J Kirkham; Angus McNair; Cecilia A C Prinsen; Jochen Schmitt; Caroline B Terwee; Bridget Young
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 2.279

3.  SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials.

Authors:  An-Wen Chan; Jennifer M Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman; Andreas Laupacis; Peter C Gøtzsche; Karmela Krleža-Jerić; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Howard Mann; Kay Dickersin; Jesse A Berlin; Caroline J Doré; Wendy R Parulekar; William S M Summerskill; Trish Groves; Kenneth F Schulz; Harold C Sox; Frank W Rockhold; Drummond Rennie; David Moher
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Using the Delphi technique to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials: recommendations for the future based on a systematic review of existing studies.

Authors:  Ian P Sinha; Rosalind L Smyth; Paula R Williamson
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2011-01-25       Impact factor: 11.069

5.  Impact of question order on prioritisation of outcomes in the development of a core outcome set: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Sara T Brookes; Katy A Chalmers; Kerry N L Avery; Karen Coulman; Jane M Blazeby
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Recruiting and retaining participants in e-Delphi surveys for core outcome set development: Evaluating the COMiT'ID study.

Authors:  Deborah Ann Hall; Harriet Smith; Eithne Heffernan; Kathryn Fackrell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total
  2 in total

1.  Developing a medication adherence technologies repository: proposed structure and protocol for an online real-time Delphi study.

Authors:  Urska Nabergoj Makovec; Catherine Goetzinger; Janette Ribaut; Pilar Barnestein-Fonseca; Frederik Haupenthal; Maria Teresa Herdeiro; Sean Patrick Grant; Cristina Jácome; Fatima Roque; Dins Smits; Ivana Tadic; Alexandra L Dima
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 3.006

2.  Core outcomes in neonatal encephalopathy: a qualitative study with parents.

Authors:  Fiona Quirke; Shabina Ariff; Malcolm Battin; Caitlin Bernard; Frank H Bloomfield; Mandy Daly; Declan Devane; David M Haas; Patricia Healy; Tim Hurley; Vincent Kibet; Jamie J Kirkham; Sarah Koskei; Shireen Meher; Eleanor Molloy; Maira Niaz; Elaine Ní Bhraonáin; Christabell Omukagah Okaronon; Farhana Tabassum; Karen Walker; Linda Biesty
Journal:  BMJ Paediatr Open       Date:  2022-07-25
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.