Cargando…

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

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 abou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Quirke, Fiona A., Healy, Patricia, Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní, Daly, Mandy, Biesty, Linda, Hurley, Tim, Walker, Karen, Meher, Shireen, Haas, David M., Bloomfield, Frank H., Kirkham, Jamie J., Molloy, Eleanor J., Devane, Declan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7885346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33588938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05074-2
_version_ 1783651584937295872
author Quirke, Fiona A.
Healy, Patricia
Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní
Daly, Mandy
Biesty, Linda
Hurley, Tim
Walker, Karen
Meher, Shireen
Haas, David M.
Bloomfield, Frank H.
Kirkham, Jamie J.
Molloy, Eleanor J.
Devane, Declan
author_facet Quirke, Fiona A.
Healy, Patricia
Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní
Daly, Mandy
Biesty, Linda
Hurley, Tim
Walker, Karen
Meher, Shireen
Haas, David M.
Bloomfield, Frank H.
Kirkham, Jamie J.
Molloy, Eleanor J.
Devane, Declan
author_sort Quirke, Fiona A.
collection PubMed
description 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05074-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7885346
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78853462021-02-17 Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial Quirke, Fiona A. Healy, Patricia Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní Daly, Mandy Biesty, Linda Hurley, Tim Walker, Karen Meher, Shireen Haas, David M. Bloomfield, Frank H. Kirkham, Jamie J. Molloy, Eleanor J. Devane, Declan Trials Study Protocol 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05074-2. BioMed Central 2021-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7885346/ /pubmed/33588938 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05074-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Quirke, Fiona A.
Healy, Patricia
Bhraonáin, Elaine Ní
Daly, Mandy
Biesty, Linda
Hurley, Tim
Walker, Karen
Meher, Shireen
Haas, David M.
Bloomfield, Frank H.
Kirkham, Jamie J.
Molloy, Eleanor J.
Devane, Declan
Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
title Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
title_full Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
title_fullStr Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
title_full_unstemmed Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
title_short Multi-Round compared to Real-Time Delphi for consensus in core outcome set (COS) development: a randomised trial
title_sort multi-round compared to real-time delphi for consensus in core outcome set (cos) development: a randomised trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7885346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33588938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05074-2
work_keys_str_mv AT quirkefionaa multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT healypatricia multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT bhraonainelaineni multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT dalymandy multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT biestylinda multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT hurleytim multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT walkerkaren multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT mehershireen multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT haasdavidm multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT bloomfieldfrankh multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT kirkhamjamiej multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT molloyeleanorj multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial
AT devanedeclan multiroundcomparedtorealtimedelphiforconsensusincoreoutcomesetcosdevelopmentarandomisedtrial