Wirksame Prävention? Ergebnisse eines Expertendelphi

Zwick, Michael M.; Schröter, Regina

doi:10.1007/978-3-531-93158-6_13

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Identifying the current state of knowledge (23) • Improving predictions of possible future circumstances (24,25) • Resolving controversial judgments (26) • Identifying and formulating standards or guidelines for theoretical and methodological issues (2,4,27) • Developing measurement tools and identifying indicators (28) • Formulating recommendations for action and prioritizing measures (29) In methodological literature on about Delphi techniques, five characteristics of classical Delphi techniques have been identified: (7,23) • Surveying experts who remain anonymous • Using a standardized questionnaire that can be adapted for every new round of questions…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Delphi Technique in Health Sciences: A Map

Niederberger

Spranger

2020

Front. Public Health

522

438

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: In health sciences, the Delphi technique is primarily used by researchers when the available knowledge is incomplete or subject to uncertainty and other methods that provide higher levels of evidence cannot be used. The aim is to collect expert-based judgments and often to use them to identify consensus. In this map, we provide an overview of the fields of application for Delphi techniques in health sciences in this map and discuss the processes used and the quality of the findings. We use systematic reviews of Delphi techniques for the map, summarize their findings and examine them from a methodological perspective. Methods: Twelve systematic reviews of Delphi techniques from different sectors of the health sciences were identified and systematically analyzed. Results: The 12 systematic reviews show, that Delphi studies are typically carried out in two to three rounds with a deliberately selected panel of experts. A large number of modifications to the Delphi technique have now been developed. Significant weaknesses exist in the quality of the reporting. Conclusion: Based on the results, there is a need for clarification with regard to the methodological approaches of Delphi techniques, also with respect to any modification. Criteria for evaluating the quality of their execution and reporting also appear to be necessary. However, it should be noted that we cannot make any statements about the quality of execution of the Delphi studies but rather our results are exclusively based on the reported findings of the systematic reviews.

show abstract