-
Medicine Feb 2023The use of the Delphi technique is prevalent across health sciences research, and it is used to identify priorities, reach consensus on issues of importance and... (Review)
Review
The use of the Delphi technique is prevalent across health sciences research, and it is used to identify priorities, reach consensus on issues of importance and establish clinical guidelines. Thus, as a form of expert opinion research, it can address fundamental questions present in healthcare. However, there is little guidance on how to conduct them, resulting in heterogenous Delphi studies and methodological confusion. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to introduce the use of the Delphi method, assess the application of the Delphi technique within health sciences research, discuss areas of methodological uncertainty and propose recommendations. Advantages of the use of Delphi include anonymity, controlled feedback, flexibility for the choice of statistical analysis, and the ability to gather participants from geographically diverse areas. Areas of methodological uncertainty worthy of further discussion broadly include experts and data management. For experts, the definition and number of participants remain issues of contention, while there are ongoing difficulties with expert selection and retention. For data management, there are issues with data collection, defining consensus and methods of data analysis, such as percent agreement, central tendency, measures of dispersion, and inferential statistics. Overall, the use of Delphi addresses important issues present in health sciences research, but methodological issues remain. It is likely that the aggregation of future Delphi studies will eventually pave the way for more comprehensive reporting guidelines and subsequent methodological clarity.
Topics: Humans; Delphi Technique; Consensus; Medicine; Research Design
PubMed: 36800594
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032829 -
Histopathology Aug 2022The Delphi method is a well-established research tool, used for consensus building across a number of fields. Despite its widespread use, and popularity in many medical... (Review)
Review
The Delphi method is a well-established research tool, used for consensus building across a number of fields. Despite its widespread use, and popularity in many medical specialities, there is a paucity of literature on the use of the Delphi method in Histopathology. This literature review seeks to critique the Delphi methodology and explore its potential applications to histopathology-based clinical and research questions. We review those published studies that have utilized the Delphi methodology in Histopathology settings and specifically outline the advantages and limitations of this technique, highlighting situations where its application can be most effective.
Topics: Consensus; Delphi Technique; Humans; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 35322456
DOI: 10.1111/his.14650 -
Research in Social & Administrative... Jan 2022Consensus research methods are used in health services research to generate evidence through systematic means of measuring collective agreement and developing consensus...
Consensus research methods are used in health services research to generate evidence through systematic means of measuring collective agreement and developing consensus from experts of a subject matter. Delphi technique is the most commonly reported consensus research method and is a structured, multistage interaction method to determine consensus using repetitive administration of anonymous questionnaires across two or three rounds. The Delphi technique is increasingly being used in pharmacy practice research. Despite its wide use in the development of statements of policies, guidelines, and performance indicators, there is lack of standardized guidelines and criteria to support the Delphi technique study design, conduct, and reporting, leading to inconsistent approaches and methodological difficulties among researchers. In this themed article, we provide the reader with a collation of best practices and highlight key methodological issues and areas of uncertainty of the Delphi method, especially as it pertains to pharmacy practice research.
Topics: Consensus; Delphi Technique; Humans; Pharmaceutical Services; Pharmacy; Pharmacy Research
PubMed: 34412997
DOI: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.06.028 -
Zeitschrift Fur Evidenz, Fortbildung... Nov 2022In the field of medicine and health sciences, Delphi methods are applied mainly in the exploratory or evaluative phases of a research process. Explicit and implicit...
In the field of medicine and health sciences, Delphi methods are applied mainly in the exploratory or evaluative phases of a research process. Explicit and implicit knowledge of respected experts from research and practice is systematically synthesized. Originally developed as a method for structuring a group communication process, Delphi techniques have been established in the health sector as a consensus method. The findings are used to improve the evidence and acceptance of planned interventions or necessary standards or guidelines and to increase the probability of successful implementation in practice. However, different variants of Delphi methods have been developed in recent years, which are systematically contrasted and reflected in this paper with regard to key epistemological and methodological research activities. Based on this overview, researchers should be enabled to select the most suitable Delphi technique for their own research questions and research endeavors.
Topics: Humans; Delphi Technique; Germany; Consensus; Research Design; Communication
PubMed: 36137932
DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.08.007 -
Research in Social & Administrative... Jan 2022The Delphi Technique is a group judgement method which is typically used to reach agreement from a group of people with expertise in a particular area. It is an... (Review)
Review
The Delphi Technique is a group judgement method which is typically used to reach agreement from a group of people with expertise in a particular area. It is an iterative process where panel members complete questionnaires over several rounds, often rating their agreement/disagreement against a statement, with changes made in later rounds based on the feedback received. It has been used widely in pharmacy-related studies relevant to education, research and practice. This paper provides a critical analysis of the various design choices which researchers may consider when planning a Delphi namely the panel of participants, the use of the Likert scale, the effect of feedback, what constitutes consensus and the number of rounds. It also gives an overview of the development and origins of the Delphi, and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the technique. Advantages include that the Delphi can be conducted with panel members in different geographical locations in their own time, however the technique can therefore take longer to conduct and lacks face-to-face discussion. Patient experts may be less comfortable participating in a relatively complex survey, however the anonymous nature of the process can be more inclusive in allowing participants to feedback candidly. This paper shows the importance of careful planning of the design choices to ensure the reliability and validity of the Delphi.
Topics: Consensus; Delphi Technique; Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Research Design; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 34244078
DOI: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2021.06.027 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2020In health sciences, the Delphi technique is primarily used by researchers when the available knowledge is incomplete or subject to uncertainty and other methods that...
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. Twelve systematic reviews of Delphi techniques from different sectors of the health sciences were identified and systematically analyzed. 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. 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.
Topics: Consensus; Delphi Technique; Medicine
PubMed: 33072683
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00457 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Jan 2024
Topics: Humans; Public Health; Delphi Technique; Global Health
PubMed: 38164326
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.24.010124 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Feb 2024
Topics: Humans; Public Health; Delphi Technique; Global Health
PubMed: 38313149
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.24.010224 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Apr 2024
Topics: Humans; Public Health; Delphi Technique; Global Health
PubMed: 38562196
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.24.010424 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Oct 2023Consensus guidelines on the anaesthetic management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have recently been published. The rigorous synthesis of... (Review)
Review
Consensus guidelines on the anaesthetic management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have recently been published. The rigorous synthesis of expert opinion is invaluable when there are limited data, and these guidelines are a significant step forward. This review both guides practice and identifies important research questions. We challenge those working in this field to collaborate and produce the evidence for whether monitored anaesthesia care (MAC) is associated with a lower incidence of adverse events and better outcomes than general anaesthesia for ERCP.
Topics: Humans; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Delphi Technique; Anesthetics; Anesthesiology; Anesthesia, General
PubMed: 37718092
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.07.001