The use of a modified Delphi procedure for the determination of 26 prognostic factors in the sub-acute stage of stroke

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 265-270

  Meijer, Ronald ^a   Ihnenfeldt, Daniela ^a   Vermeulen, Marinus ^a   De Haan, Rob ^a   Van Limbeek, Jacques ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Delphi procedure; Prognostic factors; Stroke

Indexed keywords

CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; CONVALESCENCE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DELPHI STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; DISABILITY; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROGNOSIS; SOCIAL SUPPORT;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMANS; PATIENT DISCHARGE; PROGNOSIS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL SUPPORT; SUBACUTE CARE;

EID: 1542263468     PISSN: 03425282     EISSN: 14735660     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004356-200312000-00003     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Alem van V, Meijer R 2000. A digital Delphi procedure. Consensus via the Internet. Carevision: Special Automation 11:32-33. [Published in Dutch].
2. Anonymous 2000a. Organised in-patient (stroke unit) care for stroke. Stroke Unit Trialists' Collaboration. [Review] [33 refs]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2):CD000197.
3. Anonymous (2000b). Guidelines Stroke 2000 of the Dutch Institute for Quality in Health Care CBO. [Published in Dutch].
4. Barer DH, Mitchell JR 1989. Predicting the outcome of acute stroke: do multivariate models help? Quarterly Journal of Medicine 70 (261):27-39.
5. Bernstein SJ, Laouri M, Hilborne LH, et al. 1992. Coronary angiography: a literature review and ratings of appropriateness and necessity. Santa Monica (CA): RAND. Report JRA-03.
6. Black N, Murphy M, Lamping DL, et al. 1998. Consensus development methods for creating clinical guidelines. In: Black N, Brazier J, Firtzpatrick R, Reeves B (eds). Health services research methods: a guide to best practice. London: BMJ Books; pp. 199-211.
7. Kernan WN, Feinstein AR, Brass LM 1991. A methodological appraisal of research on prognosis after transient ischemic attacks. [Review] [81 refs]. Stroke 22 (9):1108-1116.
8. Meijer R, Ihnenfeldt DS, Groot de IJM, et al. 2003a. Prognostic factors for ambulation and activities of daily living in the sub-acute phase after stroke. A systematic review of the literature. Clinical Rehabilitation 17:119-129.
9. Meijer R, Ihnenfeldt DS, Limbeek van J, et al. 2003b. Prognostic factors in the sub-acute phase after stroke for the future residence after six months to one year A systematic review of the literature. Clinical Rehabilitation 17:512-520.
10. Meijer R, Limbeek van J, Kriek B, et al. 2004. Prognostic social factors in the subacute phase after a stroke for the discharge destination from the hospital stroke-unit. A systematic review of the literature. Disability and Rehabilitation (in press).
11. Mulrow CD, Oxman AD (1999). Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. [updated September 1997]. In: The Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software.
12. Murphy MK, Black N, Lamping DL, et al. 1998. Consensus development methods and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technology Assessment 2(3): i-iv, 1-88.
13. Richardson FMcD 1972. Peer review of medical care. Medical Care 10:29-39.
14. Rycroft-Malone J 2001. Formal consensus: the development of a national clinical guideline. Quality of Health Care 10:238-244.
15. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, et al. 1991. Clinical epidemiology, a basic science for clinical medicine. 2nd Edition. Boston: Little, Brown & Company.