Cargando…

Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND: The present study introduces informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) through a three-round Expert Delphi Consensus Opinions method. METHODS: According to our previous scoping review, important items in the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Norouzkhani, Narges, Bahari, Ali, Shirvani, Javad Shokri, Faramarzi, Mahbobeh, Eslami, Saeid, Tabesh, Hamed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10557489/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37809295
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1224279
_version_ 1785117100764823552
author Norouzkhani, Narges
Bahari, Ali
Shirvani, Javad Shokri
Faramarzi, Mahbobeh
Eslami, Saeid
Tabesh, Hamed
author_facet Norouzkhani, Narges
Bahari, Ali
Shirvani, Javad Shokri
Faramarzi, Mahbobeh
Eslami, Saeid
Tabesh, Hamed
author_sort Norouzkhani, Narges
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The present study introduces informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) through a three-round Expert Delphi Consensus Opinions method. METHODS: According to our previous scoping review, important items in the area of informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information were elucidated. After omitting duplicates, 56 items in informational needs, 36 items in supportive needs, and 36 items in sources of obtaining information were retrieved. Both open- and close-ended questions were designed for each category in the form of three questionnaires. The questionnaires were sent to selected experts from different specialties. Experts responded to the questions in the first round. Based on the feedback, questions were modified and sent back to the experts in the second round. This procedure was repeated up to the third round. RESULTS: In the first round, five items from informational needs, one item from supportive needs, and seven items from sources of obtaining information were identified as unimportant and omitted. Moreover, two extra items were proposed by the experts, which were added to the informational needs category. In the second round, seven, three, and seven items from informational needs, supportive needs, and sources of obtaining information were omitted due to the items being unimportant. In the third round, all the included items gained scores equal to or greater than the average and were identified as important. Kendall coordination coefficient W was calculated to be 0.344 for information needs, 0.330 for supportive needs, and 0.325 for sources of obtaining information, indicating a fair level of agreement between experts. CONCLUSIONS: Out of 128 items in the first round, the omission of 30 items and the addition of two items generated a 100-item questionnaire for three sections of informational needs, supportive needs, and sources of obtaining information with a high level of convergence between experts' viewpoints.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10557489
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105574892023-10-07 Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study Norouzkhani, Narges Bahari, Ali Shirvani, Javad Shokri Faramarzi, Mahbobeh Eslami, Saeid Tabesh, Hamed Front Psychol Psychology BACKGROUND: The present study introduces informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) through a three-round Expert Delphi Consensus Opinions method. METHODS: According to our previous scoping review, important items in the area of informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information were elucidated. After omitting duplicates, 56 items in informational needs, 36 items in supportive needs, and 36 items in sources of obtaining information were retrieved. Both open- and close-ended questions were designed for each category in the form of three questionnaires. The questionnaires were sent to selected experts from different specialties. Experts responded to the questions in the first round. Based on the feedback, questions were modified and sent back to the experts in the second round. This procedure was repeated up to the third round. RESULTS: In the first round, five items from informational needs, one item from supportive needs, and seven items from sources of obtaining information were identified as unimportant and omitted. Moreover, two extra items were proposed by the experts, which were added to the informational needs category. In the second round, seven, three, and seven items from informational needs, supportive needs, and sources of obtaining information were omitted due to the items being unimportant. In the third round, all the included items gained scores equal to or greater than the average and were identified as important. Kendall coordination coefficient W was calculated to be 0.344 for information needs, 0.330 for supportive needs, and 0.325 for sources of obtaining information, indicating a fair level of agreement between experts. CONCLUSIONS: Out of 128 items in the first round, the omission of 30 items and the addition of two items generated a 100-item questionnaire for three sections of informational needs, supportive needs, and sources of obtaining information with a high level of convergence between experts' viewpoints. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10557489/ /pubmed/37809295 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1224279 Text en Copyright © 2023 Norouzkhani, Bahari, Shirvani, Faramarzi, Eslami and Tabesh. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Norouzkhani, Narges
Bahari, Ali
Shirvani, Javad Shokri
Faramarzi, Mahbobeh
Eslami, Saeid
Tabesh, Hamed
Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study
title Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study
title_full Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study
title_fullStr Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study
title_full_unstemmed Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study
title_short Expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a Delphi consensus study
title_sort expert opinions on informational and supportive needs and sources of obtaining information in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a delphi consensus study
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10557489/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37809295
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1224279
work_keys_str_mv AT norouzkhaninarges expertopinionsoninformationalandsupportiveneedsandsourcesofobtaininginformationinpatientswithinflammatoryboweldiseaseadelphiconsensusstudy
AT bahariali expertopinionsoninformationalandsupportiveneedsandsourcesofobtaininginformationinpatientswithinflammatoryboweldiseaseadelphiconsensusstudy
AT shirvanijavadshokri expertopinionsoninformationalandsupportiveneedsandsourcesofobtaininginformationinpatientswithinflammatoryboweldiseaseadelphiconsensusstudy
AT faramarzimahbobeh expertopinionsoninformationalandsupportiveneedsandsourcesofobtaininginformationinpatientswithinflammatoryboweldiseaseadelphiconsensusstudy
AT eslamisaeid expertopinionsoninformationalandsupportiveneedsandsourcesofobtaininginformationinpatientswithinflammatoryboweldiseaseadelphiconsensusstudy
AT tabeshhamed expertopinionsoninformationalandsupportiveneedsandsourcesofobtaininginformationinpatientswithinflammatoryboweldiseaseadelphiconsensusstudy