Reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines: a protocol for a systematic analysis of the EQUATOR Network Library

Banno, Masahiro; Tsujimoto, Yasushi; Kataoka, Yuki

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024942

Cited by 20 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This limitation hampered a more elaborate analysis of the factors that influence response rates. The reporting guideline for surveys in surgical education can be considered as an initial step towards a broadly recognized guideline, which requires an expert review by means of a Delphi study [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surveys in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review and Reporting Guideline

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Survey studies are a commonly used method for data collection in surgical education research. Nevertheless, studies investigating survey design and response rates in surgical education research are lacking. The aim of this study was to gain an insight into survey response rates among surgical residents and medical students, and provide an initial reporting guideline for future survey studies in this field. Design: PubMed (MEDLINE) was systematically searched for survey studies in surgical education from January 2007 until February 2020, according to the PRISMA statements checklist. Study selection was conducted by 2 authors, independently. Surveys directed at surgical residents and/or medical students were included if data on response rates was available. Studies reporting solely from nonsurgical fields of medicine, paramedicine, or nursing were excluded. Subgroup analyses were performed, comparing response rates for varying modes of survey, per country, and for the 10 journals with the most identified surveys. Results: From the 5,693 records screened for a larger surgical survey database, a total of 312 surveys were included; 173 studies focused on surgical residents and 139 on medical students. The mean (SD) response rate was 55.7% (24.7%) for surgical residents and 69.0% (20.8%) for medical students. The number of published surveys increased yearly, mostly driven by an increase in surgical resident surveys. Although most surveys were Web-based (n = 166, 53.2%), this survey mode resulted in the lowest response rates (mean 52.6%). The highest response rates, with a mean of 79.8% (13.1%), were seen in in-person surveys (n = 89, 28.5%). Wide variations in response rates were seen between different countries and journals. Conclusions: Web-based surveys are gaining popularity for medical research in general and for surgical education specifically; however, this mode results in lower response rates than those of in-person surveys. The response rate of in-person surveys is especially high when focusing on medical students. To improve reporting of survey studies, we present the first step towards a reporting guideline.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surveys in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review and Reporting Guideline

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, most stakeholders were engaged through the Delphi survey method, which is a simple consensus tool for obtaining the views of a large group of relevant stakeholders [54] using structured and iterative group interactions [55]. The Delphi method is commonly used in both guideline development and in health research prioritization [56][57][58], explaining its use in prioritization for guideline development.…”

Section: Interpretation Of Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The implementation of prioritization exercises in the development and update of health practice guidelines: A scoping review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The development of trustworthy guidelines requires substantial investment of resources and time. This highlights the need to prioritize topics for guideline development and update. Objective To systematically identify and describe prioritization exercises that have been conducted for the purpose of the de novo development, update or adaptation of health practice guidelines. Methods We searched Medline and CINAHL electronic databases from inception to July 2019, supplemented by hand-searching Google Scholar and the reference lists of relevant studies. We included studies describing prioritization exercises that have been conducted during the de novo development, update or adaptation of guidelines addressing clinical, public health or health systems topics. Two reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to complete study selection and data extraction. We consolidated findings in a semi-quantitative and narrative way. Results Out of 33,339 identified citations, twelve studies met the eligibility criteria. All included studies focused on prioritizing topics; none on questions or outcomes. While three exercises focused on updating guidelines, nine were on de novo development. All included studies addressed clinical topics. We adopted a framework that categorizes prioritization into 11 steps clustered in three phases (pre-prioritization, prioritization and post-prioritization). Four studies covered more than half of the 11 prioritization steps across the three phases. The

show abstract

“… 15 For the Delphi study, in lieu of a published quality assessment tool, the EQUATOR reporting guidelines were applied to assist in assessing study quality. 16 No studies were excluded based on quality assessment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of classifications systems to determine complexity of patient care needs in palliative care

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Providing the right care for each individual patient is a key element of quality palliative care. Complexity is a relatively new concept, defined as the nature of patients’ situations and the extent of resulting needs. Classifying patients according to the complexity of their care needs can guide integration of services, anticipatory discussions, health service planning, resource management and determination of needs for specialist or general palliative care. However, there is no consistent approach to interpreting and classifying complexity of patient needs. Aim: The aim of this article is to identify and describe classification systems for complexity of patient care needs in palliative care. Design: Narrative systematic review (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020182102). Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO databases were searched without time limitations. Articles were included that described classification systems for complexity of care requirements in populations with palliative care needs. Results: In total, 4301 records were screened, with nine articles identified reporting the use of patient classification systems in populations with palliative care needs. These articles included the use of six classification systems: HexCom, Perroca Scale, AN-SNAP, Hui Major Criteria, IDC-Pal and PALCOM. These systems were heterogenous in the manner they determined complexity of care needs. The HexCom and IDC-Pal systems contained items that covered all domains of complexity as described by Hodiamont; personal, social support, health care team and environment. Conclusion: Although six classification systems have been developed, they access differing aspects of care needs and their application has been limited. The HexCOM and IDC-Pal systems offer the broadest determinations of complexity from an individual perspective. Further research is needed to apply these systems to populations external to those in which they were developed, and to appreciate how they may integrate with, and impact, clinical care.

show abstract

Reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines: a protocol for a systematic analysis of the EQUATOR Network Library

Cited by 20 publications

References 18 publications

Surveys in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review and Reporting Guideline

Surveys in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review and Reporting Guideline

The implementation of prioritization exercises in the development and update of health practice guidelines: A scoping review

A systematic review of classifications systems to determine complexity of patient care needs in palliative care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About