scholarly journals A European Research Agenda for Geriatric Emergency Medicine: a modified Delphi study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon P. Mooijaart ◽  
Christian H. Nickel ◽  
Simon P. Conroy ◽  
Jacinta A. Lucke ◽  
Lisa S. van Tol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Future Research ◽  
European Research ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Geriatric Emergency Medicine

Abstract Purpose Geriatric Emergency Medicine (GEM) focuses on delivering optimal care to (sub)acutely ill older people. This involves a multidisciplinary approach throughout the whole healthcare chain. However, the underpinning evidence base is weak and it is unclear which research questions have the highest priority. The aim of this study was to provide an inventory and prioritisation of research questions among GEM professionals throughout Europe. Methods A two-stage modified Delphi approach was used. In stage 1, an online survey was administered to various professionals working in GEM both in the Emergency Department (ED) and other healthcare settings throughout Europe to make an inventory of potential research questions. In the processing phase, research questions were screened, categorised, and validated by an expert panel. Subsequently, in stage 2, remaining research questions were ranked based on relevance using a second online survey administered to the same target population, to identify the top 10 prioritised research questions. Results In response to the first survey, 145 respondents submitted 233 potential research questions. A total of 61 research questions were included in the second stage, which was completed by 176 respondents. The question with the highest priority was: Is implementation of elements of CGA (comprehensive geriatric assessment), such as screening for frailty and geriatric interventions, effective in improving outcomes for older patients in the ED? Conclusion This study presents a top 10 of high-priority research questions for a European Research Agenda for Geriatric Emergency Medicine. The list of research questions may serve as guidance for researchers, policymakers and funding bodies in prioritising future research projects.

Ongoing and Focused Provider Performance Evaluations in Emergency Medicine: Current Practices and Modified Delphi to Guide Future Practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 306-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E. Walker ◽  
Michael P. Phelan ◽  
Matthew Bitner ◽  
Eric Legome ◽  
Christian A. Tomaszewski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Performance Evaluations ◽  
Provider Performance ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Future Practice ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Current Practices

The Joint Commission requires ongoing and focused provider performance evaluations (OPPEs/FPPEs). The authors aim to describe current approaches in emergency medicine (EM) and identify consensus-based best practice recommendations. An online survey was distributed to leaders in EM to gain insight into current practices. A modified Delphi approach was then used to develop consensus to recommend best practice. A variety of strategies are currently in use for OPPE/FPPE. “Peer reviewed cases with opportunity for improvement” was identified as a preferred metric for OPPE. Although the preference was for use of peer review in OPPE, a consistent and standard adoption of robust internal care review processes is needed to establish expected norms. National benchmarking is not available currently. This was a limited survey of self-identified leaders, and there is an opportunity for additional engagement of leaders in EM to identify a unified approach that appropriately relates to patient outcomes.

scholarly journals Prioritizing a Research Agenda of Transitional Care Interventions for Childhood-Onset Disabilities

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Duncan ◽  
Dorothy Luong ◽  
Laure Perrier ◽  
Mark T. Bayley ◽  
Gail Andrew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Agenda ◽  
Transitional Care ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Consensus Meeting ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Adult Health ◽  
Childhood Onset ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Health And Social Care

Transitional care interventions have the potential to optimize continuity of care, improve health outcomes and enhance quality of life for adolescents and young adults living with chronic childhood-onset disabilities, including neurodevelopmental disorders, as they transition to adult health and social care services. The paucity of research in this area poses challenges in identifying and implementing interventions for research, evaluation and implementation. The purpose of this project was to advance this research agenda by identifying the transitional care interventions from the scientific literature and prioritize interventions for study. A modified-Delphi approach involving two rounds of online surveys followed by a face-to-face consensus meeting with knowledge users, researchers and clinician experts in transitional care (n = 19) was used. A subsequent virtual meeting concluded the formulation of next steps. Experts rated 16 categories of interventions, derived from a systematic review, on importance, impact, and feasibility. Seven of the 16 interventions categories received a mean score rating of ≥7 (out of 10) on all three rating categories. Participants then rank ordered the reduced list of seven interventions in order of priority and the top four ranked interventions advanced for further discussion at a consensus meeting. Using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist as a guide, the participants identified that a study of a peer system navigator was worthy of future evaluation. This study highlighted that transitional care interventions are complex and multifaceted. However, the presence of a peer to support system navigation, advocacy and individual and family education was considered the most ideal intervention addressing the current gap in care. Future research, which aims to engage patients and families in a co-design approach, is recommended to further develop this intervention.

scholarly journals TP9.1.4Use of a modified Delphi process to develop research priorities in Major Trauma

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke McElroy ◽  
J McGillivray ◽  
Michael Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Major Trauma ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Delphi Process ◽  
Future Research ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Trauma Research ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Research Questions

Abstract Aims Delphi methodology can be used to develop consensus opinion amongst a group of stakeholders. This can be used to prioritise clinically relevant, patient centred research questions to guide future funding allocations. The aim of our study was to identify key future research priorities pertaining to the management of major trauma in the UK. Methods A three-phased modified Delphi process was undertaken. Phase 1 involved the submission of research questions by members of the trauma community using an online survey (Phase 1). Phases 2 and 3 involved two consecutive rounds of prioritisation after questions were subdivided into 6 subcategories: Brain Injury, Rehabilitation, Trauma in Older People, Prehospital, Interventional, and Miscellaneous (Phases 2 and 3). Cut-off points were agreed by consensus among the steering subcommittees. This established a final prioritised list of research questions. Results 201 questions across all were submitted by 65 stakeholders in phase 1. After analysis and with consensus achieved, 186 questions were taken forward for prioritisation in phase 2 with 114 included in phase 3. 56 prioritised major trauma research questions across the 6 categories were identified with a clear focus on long-term patient outcomes. Conclusions Consensus from within the major trauma community has identified 56 key research questions across 6 categories. Dissemination of these questions to funding bodies to allow for the development of high-quality research is now required. There is a clear indication for targeted multi-centric multi-disciplinary research in major trauma.

SP3.1.1Research Priorities in Emergency General Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Vaughan ◽  
Robert Pearson ◽  
Jared Wohlgemut ◽  
Stephen Knight ◽  
Michael Wilson
Keyword(s):  
General Surgery ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Emergency General Surgery ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Surgical Subspecialty ◽  
Research Questions

Abstract Aims Delphi methodology can be used to achieve consensus opinion amongst experts in a particular field. This study used a modified Delphi approach to identify research priorities in emergency general surgery (EGS). The aim was to establish a research agenda using a formal consensus-based approach in an effort to identify questions relevant to EGS that have been prioritised by relevant stakeholders with an equal voice. Methods Three rounds were conducted using an electronic questionnaire and involved health care professionals, research personnel, patients and their relatives. In the first round stakeholders were invited to submit clinical research questions that they felt were priorities for future research. In rounds two and three, participants were asked to score individual questions in order of priority using a 5-point Linkert scale. Between rounds an expert panel were asked to analyse results before forwarding questions to subsequent rounds. Results Ninety-two EGS research questions were proposed in Phase 1. Following the first round of prioritisation, 47 questions progressed to the final phase. A final list of 17 research questions were identified from the final round of prioritisation. These included questions on peri-operative strategies, EGS outcomes in elderly and frail patients as well as non-technical and technical influences on EGS outcomes. Conclusion Our study provides a consensus delivered framework that should determine the research agenda for future EGS projects. It may also assist setting priorities for research funding and multi-centre collaborative strategies within the surgical subspecialty of EGS.

scholarly journals Establishing the national top 10 priority research questions to improve diabetes-related foot health and disease: a Delphi study of Australian stakeholders

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e002570
Author(s):  
Byron M Perrin ◽  
Anita Raspovic ◽  
Cylie M Williams ◽  
Stephen M Twigg ◽  
Jonathan Golledge ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Health Economics ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Foot Health ◽  
Health And Disease ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Foot Disease

IntroductionDiabetes-related foot disease is a large cause of the global disease burden yet receives very little research funding to address this large burden. To help address this gap, it is recommended to first identify the consensus priority research questions of relevant stakeholders, yet this has not been performed for diabetes-related foot disease. The aim of this study was to determine the national top 10 priority research questions for diabetes-related foot health and disease from relevant Australian stakeholders.Research design and methodsA modified three-round Delphi online survey design was used to seek opinions from relevant Australian stakeholders including those with diabetes or diabetes-related foot disease or their carers (consumers), health professionals, researchers and industry. Participants were recruited via multiple public invitations and invited to propose three research questions of most importance to them (Round 1), prioritize their 10 most important questions from all proposed questions (Round 2), and then rank questions in order of importance (Round 3).ResultsAfter Round 1, a total of 226 unique questions were proposed by 210 participants (including 121 health professionals and 72 consumers). Of those participants, 95 completed Round 2 and 69 completed Round 3. The top 10 priority research questions covered a range of topics, including health economics, peripheral neuropathy, education, infection, technology, exercise, and nutrition. Consumers prioritized peripheral neuropathy and prevention-related questions. Health professionals prioritized management-related questions including Australia’s First Peoples foot health, health economics and infection questions.ConclusionsThese priority research questions should guide future national research agendas, funding and projects to improve diabetes-related foot disease burdens in Australia and globally. Future research should focus on consumer priority research questions to improve the burden of diabetes-related foot disease on patients and nations. Further research should also investigate reasons for different priorities between consumers and health professionals.

Ascertaining top evidence in emergency medicine: A modified Delphi study

CJEM ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie J. Bazak ◽  
Jonathan Sherbino ◽  
Suneel Upadhye ◽  
Teresa Chan
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Expert Consensus ◽  
Junior Resident ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Delphi Approach ◽  
Quality Of Patient Care ◽  
Transition Into Practice ◽  
Junior Residents

AbstractObjectivesThe application of evidence-informed practice in emergency medicine (EM) is critical to improve the quality of patient care. EM is a specialty with a broad knowledge base making it daunting for a junior resident to know where to begin the acquisition of evidence-based knowledge. Our study’s objective was to formulate a list of “top papers” in the field of EM using a Delphi approach to achieve an expert consensus.MethodsParticipants were recruited from all 14 specialty EM programs across Canada by a nomination process by the program directors. The modified Delphi survey consisted of three study rounds, each round sent out via email. The study tool was piloted first with McMaster University’s specialty EM residents. During the first round, participants individually listed top papers relevant to EM. During the two subsequent rounds, participants ranked the papers listed in the first round, with a chance to adjust ranking based on group responses.ResultsA total of eight EM specialty programs responded with 30 responses across the three rounds. There were 119 studies suggested in the first round, and, by the third round, a consensus of>70% agreement was reached to generate the final list of 29 studies.ConclusionsWe produced, via an expert consensus, a list of top studies relevant for Canadian EM physicians in training. It can be used as an educational resource for junior residents as they transition into practice.

scholarly journals The perspective of European researchers of national occupational safety and health institutes for contributing to a European research agenda: a modified Delphi study

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. e015336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Gagliardi ◽  
Bruna M Rondinone ◽  
Marco Mirabile ◽  
Giuliana Buresti ◽  
Peter Ellwood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Delphi Study ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Occupational Safety ◽  
Occupational Safety And Health ◽  
European Research ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Safety And Health

scholarly journals A Modified Delphi Study to Prioritize Content for a Simulation‐based Pediatric Curriculum for Emergency Medicine Residency Training Programs

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-378
Author(s):  
Jennifer Mitzman ◽  
Ilana Bank ◽  
Rebekah A. Burns ◽  
Michael C. Nguyen ◽  
Pavan Zaveri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Medicine ◽  
Residency Training ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Simulation Based

scholarly journals Developing a conceptual model of influences around integrated reporting, new insights and directions for future research

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 450-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charl de Villiers ◽  
Pei-Chi Kelly Hsiao ◽  
Warren Maroun
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Integrated Reporting ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Prior Literature ◽  
Research Questions

Purpose This paper aims to develop a conceptual model for examining the development of integrated reporting, relate the articles in this Meditari Accountancy Research special issue on integrated reporting to the model and identify areas for future research. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses a narrative/discursive style to summarise key findings from the articles in the special issue and develop a normative research agenda. Findings The findings of the prior literature, as well as the articles in this special issue, support the conceptual model developed in this paper. This new conceptual model can be used in multiple ways. Originality/value The special issue draws on some of the latest developments in integrated reporting from multiple jurisdictions. Different theoretical frameworks and methodologies, coupled with primary evidence on integrated reporting, construct a pluralistic assessment of integrated reporting, which can be used as a basis for future research. The new conceptual model developed in this paper can be used as an organising framework; a way of understanding and thinking about the various influences; a way of identifying additional factors to control for in a study; and/or a way of identifying new, interesting and underexplored research questions.

scholarly journals A consensus building exercise to determine research priorities for silver trauma

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Alshibani ◽  
Jay Banerjee ◽  
Fiona Lecky ◽  
Timothy J. Coats ◽  
Rebecca Prest ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Trauma Care ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Trauma Centre ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
List Type ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Modified Delphi Technique ◽  
Research Questions

Abstract Background Emergency care research into ‘Silver Trauma’, which is simply defined as major trauma consequent upon relatively minor injury mechanisms, is facing many challenges including that at present, there is no clear prioritisation of the issues. This study aimed to determine the top research priorities to guide future research. Methods This consensus-based prioritization exercise used a three-stage modified Delphi technique. The study consisted of an idea generating (divergent) first round, a ranking evaluation in the second round, and a (convergent) consensus meeting in the third round. Results A total of 20 research questions advanced to the final round of this study. After discussing the importance and clinical significance of each research question, five research questions were prioritised by the experts; the top three research priorities were: What are older people’s preferred goals of trauma care? Beyond the Emergency Department (ED), what is the appropriate combined geriatric and trauma care? Do older adults benefit from access to trauma centres? If so, do older trauma patients have equitable access to trauma centre compared to younger adults? Conclusion The results of this study will assist clinicians, researchers, and organisations that are interested in silver trauma in guiding their future efforts and funding toward addressing the identified research priorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document