Three nested randomized controlled trials of peer-only or multiple stakeholder group feedback within Delphi surveys during core outcome and information set development

Trials

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Brookes, Sara T ^a   Macefield, Rhiannon C ^a   Williamson, Paula R ^b   McNair, Angus G ^a   Potter, Shelley ^a   Blencowe, Natalie S ^a,c   Strong, Sean ^a   Blazeby, Jane M ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS BRISTOL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Consensus; Core information set; Core outcome set; Delphi; Feedback

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL STUDY; CONSENSUS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HUMAN; PEER GROUP; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REGISTRATION; AGED; BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; COLORECTAL TUMOR; COOPERATION; DELPHI STUDY; ESOPHAGUS TUMOR; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL FEEDBACK; PSYCHOLOGY; STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WOUND HEALING;

AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; CONSENSUS; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; FEEDBACK, PSYCHOLOGICAL; FEMALE; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MAMMAPLASTY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENTS; PEER GROUP; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RESEARCH DESIGN; STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 84982202429     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17456215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1479-x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM, Clarke M, Devane D, Gargon E, Tugwell P. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials. 2012;13(132):1-8.
2. COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative. http://www.comet-initiative.org/. Accessed 09 Apr 2015.
3. Blazeby JM, Macefield RC, Blencowe NS, Jacobs M, McNair AG, Sprangers M, Brookes ST. A core information set for surgery for oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 2015;102(8):936-43.
4. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001.
5. Main B, Davies L, McNair AG, Blazeby JM. Bringing informed consent back to patients. BMJ Blogs 2014. http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2014/08/05/barry-main-et-al-bringing-informed-consent-back-to-patients/. Accessed 09 Apr 2015.
6. Gorst SL, Gargon E, Clarke M, Blazeby JM, Altman DG, Williamson PR. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: an updated review and user survey. PLoS One. 2016; 11(1):e0146444.
7. Dalkey N, Helmer O. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag Sci. 1963;9(3):458-67.
8. Rowe G, Wright G, McColl A. Judgment change during Delphi-like procedures: the role of majority influence, expertise, and confidence. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2005;72(4):377-99.
9. Rowe G, Wright G. The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques. Int J Forecast. 1996;12(1):73-89.
10. Isenberg DJ. Group polarization: a critical review and meta-analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;50(6):1141-51.
11. Boulkedid R, Abdoul H, Loustau M, Sibony O, Alberti C. Using and reporting the Delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e20476.
12. Meijering JV, Tobi H. The effect of controlled opinion feedback on Delphi features: Mixed messages from a real-world Delphi experiment. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2016;103:166-73.
13. Sinha IP, Smyth RL, Williamson PR. Using the Delphi technique to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials: recommendations for the future based on a systematic review of existing studies. PLoS Med. 2011;8(1):e1000393.
14. Rowe G, Wright G. The Delphi technique: Past, present, and future prospects-introduction to the special issue. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2011;78(9):1487-90.
15. Campbell SM, Hann M, Roland MO, Quayle JA, Shekelle PG. The effect of panel membership and feedback on ratings in a two-round Delphi survey: results of a randomized controlled trial. Med Care. 1999;37:964-8.
16. Harman NL, Bruce IA, Kirkham JJ, Tierney S, Callery P, O'Brien K, Bennett AM, Chorbachi R, Hall PN, Harding-Bell A, Parfect VH. The importance of integration of stakeholder views in core outcome set development: Otitis media with effusion in children with cleft palate. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0129514.
17. McNair AGK, Whistance RN, Forsythe RO, Macefield R, Rees J, Jones JE, Smith G, Pullyblank AM, Avery KNL, Brookes ST, Thomas MG, Sylvester PA, Russell A, Oliver A, Morton D, Kennedy R, Jayne DG, Huxtable R, Hackett R, Dutton S, Coleman MG, Card M, Brown J, Blazeby JM. Core outcomes for colorectal cancer surgery: an international consensus study. PLoS Med. In press.
18. Potter S, Holcombe C, Ward JA, Blazeby JM. Development of a core outcome set for research and audit studies in reconstructive breast surgery. Br J Surg. 2015;102(11):1360-71.
19. Whistance RN, Forsythe RO, McNair AG, Brookes ST, Avery KN, Pullyblank AM, Sylvester PA, Jayne DG, Jones JE, Brown J, et al. A systematic review of outcome reporting in colorectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(10):e548-60.
20. McNair AGK, Whistance RN, Forsythe RO, Rees J, Jones JE, Pullyblank AM, Avery KNL, Brookes ST, Thomas MG, Sylvester PA, Russell A, Oliver A, Morton D, Kennedy R, Jayne DG, Huxtable R, Hackett R, Dutton SJ, Coleman MG, Card M, Brown J, Blazeby JM On behalf of the CONSENSUS-CRC (Core Outcomes and iNformation SEts iN Surgical Studies - ColoRectal Cancer) working group. Synthesis and summary of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17(11):O217-29.
21. Potter S, Brigic A, Whiting PF, Cawthorn SJ, Avery KNL, Donovan JL, Blazeby JM. Reporting clinical outcomes of breast reconstruction: a systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:31-46.
22. Blencowe NS, Strong S, McNair AGK, Brookes ST, Crosby T, Griffin SM, Blazeby JM. Reporting of short-term clinical outcomes after esophagectomy: a systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255:658-66.
23. Macefield RC, Jacobs M, Korfage IJ, Nicklin J, Whistance RN, Brookes ST, Sprangers MA, Blazeby JM. Developing core outcomes sets: methods for identifying and including patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Trials. 2014;15:49.
24. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station: StataCorp LP; 2013.
25. Campbell SM, Shield T, Rogers A, Gask L. How do stakeholder groups vary in a Delphi technique about primary mental health care and what factors influence their ratings? Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13:428-34.
26. Bardecki MJ. Participants' response to the Delphi method: an attitudinal perspective. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 1984;25(3):281-92.
27. Bolger F, Stranieri A, Wright G, Yearwood J. Does the Delphi process lead to increased accuracy in group-based judgmental forecasts or does it simply induce consensus amongst judgmental forecasters? Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2011;78(9):1671-80.
28. Bolger F, Wright G. Improving the Delphi process: lessons from social psychological research. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2011;78(9):1500-13.
29. Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, Pencharz PB, Ling SC, Moore AM, Wales PW. Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67:401-9.
30. Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing: a tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks: Sage 2005.