scholarly journals Engaging Patients and Professionals to Evaluate the Seriousness of Maternal and Child Health Outcomes: Protocol for a Modified Delphi Study

10.2196/16478 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e16478 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M Bodnar ◽  
Dmitry Khodyakov ◽  
Katherine P Himes ◽  
Jessica G Burke ◽  
Sara Parisi ◽  
...  

Background Maternal weight gain during pregnancy is one of the few potentially modifiable risk factors for many adverse maternal and child health outcomes. Defining the optimal pregnancy weight gain range is difficult because, while lower weight gain may prevent some outcomes, such as maternal and child obesity, it may increase the risk of others such as fetal growth restriction and infant death. These health outcomes vary in their seriousness to mothers and their health care providers, and these differences in seriousness should be taken into account when determining optimal weight gain ranges. However, the relative seriousness that women and their care providers place on different health outcomes is unknown. Objective We will determine the seriousness of 11 maternal and child health outcomes that have been consistently associated with pregnancy weight gain. We will achieve this by engaging patients and maternal and child health professionals using an online modified Delphi panel process. Methods We aim to recruit a racially/ethnically and geographically diverse group of 90 US maternal and child health professionals and 90 women who are pregnant or less than 2 years postpartum. We will conduct 3 concurrent panels using the ExpertLens system, a previously evaluated online modified Delphi system that combines 2 rounds of rating with 1 round of feedback and moderated online discussion. In Round 1, panelists are asked to rate the seriousness of each health outcome on a scale of 0-100 and to provide a rationale for their scores. In Round 2, panelists will review their responses relative to those of other panelists. They will discuss their seriousness ratings anonymously using a moderated online discussion board. In Round 3, participants will revise their Round 1 responses based on group feedback and discussion. Each round will be open for 1-2 weeks. Results The study protocol was reviewed by our ethics boards and did not require approval as human research. A pilot study of 6 professionals and 7 patients was completed in December 2019. Conclusions Our numeric estimates of the seriousness of maternal and child health outcomes will enable future studies to determine pregnancy weight gain ranges that balance the risks of low and high weight gain for mothers and children. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/16478

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M Bodnar ◽  
Dmitry Khodyakov ◽  
Katherine P Himes ◽  
Jessica G Burke ◽  
Sara Parisi ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Maternal weight gain during pregnancy is one of the few potentially modifiable risk factors for many adverse maternal and child health outcomes. Defining the optimal pregnancy weight gain range is difficult because, while lower weight gain may prevent some outcomes, such as maternal and child obesity, it may increase the risk of others such as fetal growth restriction and infant death. These health outcomes vary in their seriousness to mothers and their health care providers, and these differences in seriousness should be taken into account when determining optimal weight gain ranges. However, the relative seriousness that women and their care providers place on different health outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE We will determine the seriousness of 11 maternal and child health outcomes that have been consistently associated with pregnancy weight gain. We will achieve this by engaging patients and maternal and child health professionals using an online modified Delphi panel process. METHODS We aim to recruit a racially/ethnically and geographically diverse group of 90 US maternal and child health professionals and 90 women who are pregnant or less than 2 years postpartum. We will conduct 3 concurrent panels using the ExpertLens system, a previously evaluated online modified Delphi system that combines 2 rounds of rating with 1 round of feedback and moderated online discussion. In Round 1, panelists are asked to rate the seriousness of each health outcome on a scale of 0-100 and to provide a rationale for their scores. In Round 2, panelists will review their responses relative to those of other panelists. They will discuss their seriousness ratings anonymously using a moderated online discussion board. In Round 3, participants will revise their Round 1 responses based on group feedback and discussion. Each round will be open for 1-2 weeks. RESULTS The study protocol was reviewed by our ethics boards and did not require approval as human research. A pilot study of 6 professionals and 7 patients was completed in December 2019. CONCLUSIONS Our numeric estimates of the seriousness of maternal and child health outcomes will enable future studies to determine pregnancy weight gain ranges that balance the risks of low and high weight gain for mothers and children. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/16478


Author(s):  
Lisa M. Bodnar ◽  
Dmitry Khodyakov ◽  
Sara M. Parisi ◽  
Katherine P. Himes ◽  
Jessica G. Burke ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Lisa M. Bodnar ◽  
Abigail R. Cartus ◽  
Sara M. Parisi ◽  
Barbara Abrams ◽  
Katherine P. Himes ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 64 (12) ◽  
pp. 785-787
Author(s):  
Emily Oken ◽  
Ken P. Kleinman ◽  
Mandy B. Belfort ◽  
James K. Hammitt ◽  
Matthew W. Gillman

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmitry Khodyakov ◽  
Sujeong Park ◽  
Jennifer Hutcheon ◽  
Sara Parisi ◽  
Lisa Bodnar

Abstract Background: Multi-stakeholder engagement is crucial for conducting health services research. Delphi-based methodologies combining iterative rounds of questions with feedback on and discussion of group results are a well-documented approach to multi-stakeholder engagement. The aim of this study is to develop hypotheses about the impact of panel composition and topic on the propensity and meaningfulness of response changes in multi-stakeholder modified-Delphi panels.Methods: We conducted three online modified-Delphi multi-stakeholder panels using the same protocol. We assigned 60 maternal and child health professionals to a homogeneous (professionals-only) panel, 60 pregnant or postpartum women (patients) to a homogeneous panel, and 30 professionals and 30 patients to a mixed panel. In Round 1, participants rated seriousness of 11 maternal and child health outcomes using 0-100 scale and explained their ratings. In Round 2, participants saw Round 1 results and discussed them using anonymous, moderated online discussion boards. In Round 3, participants revised their original ratings. Our outcome measures included binary indicators of response changes to ratings of low, medium, and high severity maternal and child health outcomes and their meaningfulness, measured by a change of 10 or more points on a 0-100 scale.Results: Participants changed 55% of responses; the majority of response changes were meaningful. We developed three main hypotheses. First, stakeholders may be more likely to change their responses on preference-sensitive topics where there is a range of viable alternatives or perspectives. Second, patients may be more likely to change their responses and to do so meaningfully in mixed panels, whereas professionals may be more likely to do so in homogeneous panels. Third, the association between panel composition and response change may vary according to the topic.Conclusions: Results of our work not only helped generate empirically-derived hypotheses to be tested in future research, but also offer practical recommendations for designing multi-stakeholder online modified-Delphi panels.Registration: International Registered Report Identifier: DERR1-10.2196/16478


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document