A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Community consensus on core open science practices to monitor in biomedicine.

The state of open science needs to be monitored to track changes over time and identify areas to create interventions to drive improvements. In order to monitor open science practices, they first need to be well defined and operationalized. To reach consensus on what open science practices to monitor at biomedical research institutions, we conducted a modified 3-round Delphi study. Participants were research administrators, researchers, specialists in dedicated open science roles, and librarians. In rounds 1 and 2, participants completed an online survey evaluating a set of potential open science practices, and for round 3, we hosted two half-day virtual meetings to discuss and vote on items that had not reached consensus. Ultimately, participants reached consensus on 19 open science practices. This core set of open science practices will form the foundation for institutional dashboards and may also be of value for the development of policy, education, and interventions.

Quality measures in pre-liver transplant care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care.

Management of coagulopathy among patients with cirrhosis undergoing upper endoscopy and paracentesis: Persistent gaps and areas of consensus in a multispecialty Delphi.

Patients with cirrhosis have abnormal coagulation indices such as a high international normalized ratio and low platelet count, but these do not correlate well with periprocedural bleeding risk. We sought to develop a consensus among the multiple stakeholders in cirrhosis care to inform process measures that can help improve the quality of the periprocedural management of coagulopathy in cirrhosis. We identified candidate process measures for periprocedural coagulopathy management in multiple contexts relating to the performance of paracentesis and upper endoscopy. An 11-member panel with content expertise was convened. It included nominees from professional societies for interventional radiology, transfusion medicine, and anesthesia as well as representatives from hematology, emergency medicine, transplant surgery, and community practice. Each measure was evaluated for agreement using a modified Delphi approach (3 rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Out of 286 possible measures, 33 measures made the final set. International normalized ratio testing was not required for diagnostic or therapeutic paracentesis as well as diagnostic endoscopy. Plasma transfusion should be avoided for all paracenteses and diagnostic endoscopy. No consensus was achieved for these items in therapeutic intent or emergent endoscopy. The risks of prophylactic platelet transfusions exceed their benefits for outpatient diagnostic paracentesis and diagnostic endosopies. For the other procedures examined, the risks outweigh benefits when platelet count is >20,000/mm 3 . It is uncertain whether risks outweigh benefits below 20,000/mm 3 in other contexts. No consensus was achieved on whether it was permissible to continue or stop systemic anticoagulation. Continuous aspirin was permissible for each procedure. Clopidogrel was permissible for diagnostic and therapeutic paracentesis and diagnostic endoscopy. We found many areas of consensus that may serve as a foundation for a common set of practice metrics for the periprocedural management of coagulopathy in cirrhosis.

Assessment of Advanced Diagnostic Bronchoscopy Outcomes for Peripheral Lung Lesions: A Delphi Consensus Definition of Diagnostic Yield and Recommendations for Patient-centered Study Designs. An Official American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians Research Statement.

Background: Advanced diagnostic bronchoscopy targeting the lung periphery has developed at an accelerated pace over the last two decades, whereas evidence to support introduction of innovative technologies has been variable and deficient. A major gap relates to variable reporting of diagnostic yield, in addition to limited comparative studies. Objectives: To develop a research framework to standardize the evaluation of advanced diagnostic bronchoscopy techniques for peripheral lung lesions. Specifically, we aimed for consensus on a robust definition of diagnostic yield, and we propose potential study designs at various stages of technology development. Methods: Panel members were selected for their diverse expertise. Workgroup meetings were conducted in virtual or hybrid format. The cochairs subsequently developed summary statements, with voting proceeding according to a modified Delphi process. The statement was cosponsored by the American Thoracic Society and the American College of Chest Physicians. Results: Consensus was reached on 15 statements on the definition of diagnostic outcomes and study designs. A strict definition of diagnostic yield should be used, and studies should be reported according to the STARD (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) guidelines. Clinical or radiographic follow-up may be incorporated into the reference standard definition but should not be used to calculate diagnostic yield from the procedural encounter. Methodologically robust comparative studies, with incorporation of patient-reported outcomes, are needed to adequately assess and validate minimally invasive diagnostic technologies targeting the lung periphery. Conclusions: This American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians statement aims to provide a research framework that allows greater standardization of device validation efforts through clearly defined diagnostic outcomes and robust study designs. High-quality studies, both industry and publicly funded, can support subsequent health economic analyses and guide implementation decisions in various healthcare settings.

A Research Agenda to Improve Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Cardiovascular Disease: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Background: Individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are often at risk for or have comorbid cardiovascular disease and are likely to die of cardiovascular-related causes. Objectives: To prioritize a list of research topics related to the diagnosis and management of patients with COPD and comorbid cardiovascular diseases (heart failure, atherosclerotic vascular disease, and atrial fibrillation) by summarizing existing evidence and using consensus-based methods. Methods: A literature search was performed. References were reviewed by committee co-chairs. An international, multidisciplinary committee, including a patient advocate, met virtually to review evidence and identify research topics. A modified Delphi approach was used to prioritize topics in real time on the basis of their potential for advancing the field. Results: Gaps spanned the translational science spectrum from basic science to implementation: 1) disease mechanisms; 2) epidemiology; 3) subphenotyping; 4) diagnosis and management; 5) clinical trials; 6) care delivery; 7) medication access, adherence, and side effects; 8) risk factor mitigation; 9) cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation; and 10) health equity. Seventeen experts participated, and quorum was achieved for all votes (>80%). Of 17 topics, ≥70% agreement was achieved for 12 topics after two rounds of voting. The range of summative Likert scores was -15 to 25. The highest priority was "Conduct pragmatic clinical trials with patient-centered outcomes that collect both pulmonary and cardiac data elements." Health equity was identified as an important topic that should be embedded within all research. Conclusions: We propose a prioritized research agenda with the purpose of stimulating high-impact research that will hopefully improve outcomes among people with COPD and cardiovascular disease.

Definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of angioedema (DANCE): AAAAI, ACAAI, ACARE, and APAAACI DANCE consensus.

BACKGROUND: Angioedema (AE) manifests with intermittent, localized, self-limiting swelling of the subcutaneous and/or submucosal tissue. AE is heterogeneous, can be hereditary or acquired, may occur only once or be recurrent, may exhibit wheals or not, and may be due to mast cell mediators, bradykinin, or other mechanisms. Several different taxonomic systems are currently used, making it difficult to compare the results of studies, develop multicenter collaboration, and harmonize AE treatment. OBJECTIVE: We developed a consensus on the definition, acronyms, nomenclature, and classification of AE (DANCE). METHODS: The initiative involved 91 experts from 35 countries and was endorsed by 53 scientific and medical societies, and patient organizations. A consensus was reached by online discussion and voting using the Delphi process over a period of 16 months (June 2021 to November 2022). RESULTS: The DANCE initiative resulted in an international consensus on the definition, classification, and terminology of AE. The new consensus classification features 5 types and endotypes of AE and a harmonized vocabulary of abbreviations/acronyms. CONCLUSION: The DANCE classification complements current clinical guidelines and expert consensus recommendations on the diagnostic assessment and treatment of AE. DANCE does not replace current clinical guidelines, and expert consensus algorithms and should not be misconstrued in a way that affects reimbursement of medicines prescribed by physicians using sound clinical judgment. We anticipate that this new AE taxonomy and nomenclature will harmonize and facilitate AE research and clinical studies, thereby improving patient care.

Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT): International Delphi consensus for procedural preparation and consent.

BACKGROUND: Despite the promise of oral immunotherapy (OIT) to treat food allergies, this procedure is associated with potential risk. There is no current agreement about what elements should be included in the preparatory or consent process. OBJECTIVE: We developed consensus recommendations about the OIT process considerations and patient-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and developed a consensus OIT consent process and information form. METHODS: We convened a 36-member Preparing Patients for Oral Immunotherapy (PPOINT) panel of allergy experts to develop a consensus OIT patient preparation, informed consent process, and framework form. Consensus for themes and statements was reached using Delphi methodology, and the consent information form was developed. RESULTS: The expert panel reached consensus for 4 themes and 103 statements specific to OIT preparatory procedures, of which 76 statements reached consensus for inclusion specific to the following themes: general considerations for counseling patients about OIT; patient- and family-specific factors that should be addressed before initiating OIT and during OIT; indications for initiating OIT; and potential contraindications and precautions for OIT. The panel reached consensus on 9 OIT consent form themes: benefits, risks, outcomes, alternatives, risk mitigation, difficulties/challenges, discontinuation, office policies, and long-term management. From these themes, 219 statements were proposed, of which 189 reached consensus, and 71 were included on the consent information form. CONCLUSION: We developed consensus recommendations to prepare and counsel patients for safe and effective OIT in clinical practice with evidence-based risk mitigation. Adoption of these recommendations may help standardize clinical care and improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

Quality indicators for evaluating cancer care in low-income and middle-income country settings: a multinational modified Delphi study.

This Policy Review sourced opinions from experts in cancer care across low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) to build consensus around high-priority measures of care quality. A comprehensive list of quality indicators in medical, radiation, and surgical oncology was identified from systematic literature reviews. A modified Delphi study consisting of three 90-min workshops and two international electronic surveys integrating a global range of key clinical, policy, and research leaders was used to derive consensus on cancer quality indicators that would be both feasible to collect and were high priority for cancer care systems in LMICs. Workshop participants narrowed the list of 216 quality indicators from the literature review to 34 for inclusion in the subsequent surveys. Experts' responses to the surveys showed consensus around nine high-priority quality indicators for measuring the quality of hospital-based cancer care in LMICs. These quality indicators focus on important processes of care delivery from accurate diagnosis (eg, histologic diagnosis via biopsy and TNM staging) to adequate, timely, and appropriate treatment (eg, completion of radiotherapy and appropriate surgical intervention). The core indicators selected could be used to implement systems of feedback and quality improvement.

Standardised definitions and diagnostic criteria for extranodal extension detected on histopathological examination in head and neck cancer: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations.

Detection of extranodal extension on histopathology in surgically treated head and neck squamous cell carcinoma indicates poor prognosis. However, there is no consensus on the diagnostic criteria, interpretation, and reporting of histology detected extranodal extension, which has contributed to conflicting evidence in the literature, and likely clinical inconsistency. The Head and Neck Cancer International Group conducted a three-round modified Delphi process with a group of 19 international pathology experts representing 15 national clinical research groups to generate consensus recommendations for histology detected extranodal extension diagnostic criteria. The expert panel strongly agreed on terminology and diagnostic features for histology detected extranodal extension and soft tissue metastasis. Moreover, the panel reached consensus on reporting of histology detected extranodal extension and on nodal sampling. These consensus recommendations, endorsed by 19 organisations representing 34 countries, are a crucial development towards standardised diagnosis and reporting of histology detected extranodal extension, and more accurate data collection and analysis.

Defining the quality of interdisciplinary care for patients with brain metastases: modified Delphi panel recommendations.

The value of interdisciplinary teams in improving outcomes and quality of care of patients with brain metastases remains uncertain, partly due to the lack of consensus on key indicators to evaluate interprofessional care. We aimed to obtain expert consensus across disciplines on indicators that evaluate the quality and value of brain metastases care. A steering committee of key opinion leaders curated relevant outcomes and process indicators from a literature review and a stakeholder needs assessment, and an international panel of physicians rated the outcomes and process indicators using a modified Delphi method. After three rounds, a consensus was reached on 29 indicators encompassing brain-directed oncological treatment, surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, supportive or palliative care, and interdisciplinary team care. The Brain Metastases Quality-of-Care measure reflects the value and quality of brain metastases team-based care according to treatment modality and provides a benchmark of care for this under-studied patient population. The adoption, implementation, and sustainability of this set of indicators could help address the need expressed by patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians for more coordinated care across inpatient, outpatient, home, community, and tertiary academic settings.

Criteria for the diagnosis of extranodal extension detected on radiological imaging in head and neck cancer: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations.

Extranodal extension of tumour on histopathology is known to be a negative prognostic factor in head and neck cancer. Compelling evidence suggests that extranodal extension detected on radiological imaging is also a negative prognostic factor. Furthermore, if imaging detected extranodal extension could be identified reliably before the start of treatment, it could be used to guide treatment selection, as patients might be better managed with non-surgical approaches to avoid the toxicity and cost of trimodality therapy (surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy together). There are many aspects of imaging detected extranodal extension that remain unresolved or are without consensus, such as the criteria to best diagnose them and the associated terminology. The Head and Neck Cancer International Group conducted a five-round modified Delphi process with a group of 18 international radiology experts, representing 14 national clinical research groups. We generated consensus recommendations on the terminology and diagnostic criteria for imaging detected extranodal extension to harmonise clinical practice and research. These recommendations have been endorsed by 19 national and international organisations, representing 34 countries. We propose a new classification system to aid diagnosis, which was supported by most of the participating experts over existing systems, and which will require validation in the future. Additionally, we have created an online educational resource for grading imaging detected extranodal extensions.

Delphi consensus on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for oligometastatic and oligoprogressive renal cell carcinoma-a European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology study endorsed by the European Association of Urology.

The purpose of this European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) project, endorsed by the European Association of Urology, is to explore expert opinion on the management of patients with oligometastatic and oligoprogressive renal cell carcinoma by means of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) on extracranial metastases, with the aim of developing consensus recommendations for patient selection, treatment doses, and concurrent systemic therapy. A questionnaire on SABR in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma was prepared by a core group and reviewed by a panel of ten prominent experts in the field. The Delphi consensus methodology was applied, sending three rounds of questionnaires to clinicians identified as key opinion leaders in the field. At the end of the third round, participants were able to find consensus on eight of the 37 questions. Specifically, panellists agreed to apply no restrictions regarding age (25 [100%) of 25) and primary renal cell carcinoma histology (23 [92%] of 25) for SABR candidates, on the upper threshold of three lesions to offer ablative treatment in patients with oligoprogression, and on the concomitant administration of immune checkpoint inhibitor. SABR was indicated as the treatment modality of choice for renal cell carcinoma bone oligometatasis (20 [80%] of 25) and for adrenal oligometastases 22 (88%). No consensus or major agreement was reached regarding the appropriate schedule, but the majority of the poll (54%-58%) retained the every-other-day schedule as the optimal choice for all the investigated sites. The current ESTRO Delphi consensus might provide useful direction for the application of SABR in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma and highlight the key areas of ongoing debate, perhaps directing future research efforts to close knowledge gaps.

A minimum data set-Core outcome set, core data elements, and core measurement set-For degenerative cervical myelopathy research (AO Spine RECODE DCM): A consensus study.

BACKGROUND: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a progressive chronic spinal cord injury estimated to affect 1 in 50 adults. Without standardised guidance, clinical research studies have selected outcomes at their discretion, often underrepresenting the disease and limiting comparability between studies. Utilising a standard minimum data set formed via multi-stakeholder consensus can address these issues. This combines processes to define a core outcome set (COS)-a list of key outcomes-and core data elements (CDEs), a list of key sampling characteristics required to interpret the outcomes. Further "how" these outcomes should be measured and/or reported is then defined in a core measurement set (CMS). This can include a recommendation of a standardised time point at which outcome data should be reported. This study defines a COS, CDE, and CMS for DCM research. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A minimum data set was developed using a series of modified Delphi processes. Phase 1 involved the setup of an international DCM stakeholder group. Phase 2 involved the development of a longlist of outcomes, data elements, and formation into domains. Phase 3 prioritised the outcomes and CDEs using a two-stage Delphi process. Phase 4 determined the final DCM minimal data set using a consensus meeting. Using the COS, Phase 5 finalised definitions of the measurement construct for each outcome. In Phase 6, a systematic review of the literature was performed, to scope and define the psychometric properties of measurement tools. Phase 7 used a modified Delphi process to inform the short-listing of candidate measurement tools. The final measurement set was then formed through a consensus meeting (Phase 8). To support implementation, the data set was then integrated into template clinical research forms (CRFs) for use in future clinical trials (Phase 9). In total, 28 outcomes and 6 domains (Pain, Neurological Function, Life Impact, Radiology, Economic Impact, and Adverse Events) were entered into the final COS. Thirty two outcomes and 4 domains (Individual, Disease, Investigation, and Intervention) were entered into the final CDE. Finally, 4 outcome instruments (mJOA, NDI, SF-36v2, and SAVES2) were identified for the CMS, with a recommendation for trials evaluating outcomes after surgery, to include baseline measurement and at 6 months from surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The AO Spine RECODE-DCM has produced a minimum data set for use in DCM clinical trials today. These are available at https://myelopathy.org/minimum-dataset/. While it is anticipated the CDE and COS have strong and durable relevance, it is acknowledged that new measurement tools, alongside an increasing transition to study patients not undergoing surgery, may necessitate updates and adaptation, particularly with respect to the CMS.

An expert discussion on the atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome nomenclature-identifying a road map to precision: a report of a National Kidney Foundation Working Group.

The term atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome has been in use since the mid-1970s. It was initially used to describe the familial or sporadic form of hemolytic uremic syndrome as opposed to the epidemic, typical form of the disease. Over time, the atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome term has evolved into being used to refer to anything that is not Shiga toxin-associated hemolytic uremic syndrome. The term describes a heterogeneous group of diseases of disparate causes, a circumstance that makes defining disease-specific natural history and/or targeted treatment approaches challenging. A working group of specialty-specific experts in the thrombotic microangiopathies was convened to review the validity of this broad term in an era of swiftly advancing science and targeted therapeutics. A Delphi approach was used to define and interrogate some of the key issues related to the atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome nomenclature.

International consensus recommendations on face transplantation: A 2-step Delphi study.

Face transplantation is a viable reconstructive approach for severe craniofacial defects. Despite the evolution witnessed in the field, ethical aspects, clinical and psychosocial implications, public perception, and economic sustainability remain the subject of debate and unanswered questions. Furthermore, poor data reporting and sharing, the absence of standardized metrics for outcome evaluation, and the lack of consensus definitions of success and failure have hampered the development of a "transplantation culture" on a global scale. We completed a 2-round online modified Delphi process with 35 international face transplant stakeholders, including surgeons, clinicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, ethicists, policymakers, and researchers, with a representation of 10 of the 19 face transplant teams that had already performed the procedure and 73% of face transplants. Themes addressed included patient assessment and selection, indications, social support networks, clinical framework, surgical considerations, data on patient progress and outcomes, definitions of success and failure, public image and perception, and financial sustainability. The presented recommendations are the product of a shared commitment of face transplant teams to foster the development of face transplantation and are aimed at providing a gold standard of practice and policy.

Generating strategies for a national comeback in pancreas transplantation: A Delphi survey and US conference report.

In the United States, potential transplant candidates with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus are inconsistently offered pancreas transplantation (PTx), contributing to a dramatic decline in pancreas allograft utilization over the past 2 decades. The American Society of Transplantation organized a workshop to identify barriers inhibiting PTx and to develop strategies for a national comeback. The 2-day workshop focused on 4 main topics: (1) referral/candidate selection, (2) organ recovery/utilization, (3) program performance/patient outcomes, and (4) enhanced education/research. Topics were explored through expert presentations, patient testimonials, breakout sessions, and strategic planning, including the identification of tasks for immediate focus. Additionally, a modified-Delphi survey was conducted among workshop members to develop and rate the importance of barriers, and the impact and feasibility of workgroup-identified improvement strategies. The panelists identified 16 barriers to progress and 44 strategies for consideration. The steps for a national comeback in PTx involve greater emphasis on efficient referral and candidate selection, better donor pancreas utilization practices, eliminating financial barriers to procurement and transplant, improving collaboration between transplant and diabetes societies and professionals, and increasing focus on PTx training, education, and research. Partnership between national societies, patient advocacy groups, and professionals will be essential to realizing this critical agenda.

Defining remission in childhood-onset lupus: PReS-endorsed consensus definitions by an international task force.

OBJECTIVE: To derive childhood-onset SLE (cSLE) specific remission definitions for future treat-to-target (T2T) trials, observational studies, and clinical practice. METHODS: The cSLE International T2T Task Force conducted Delphi surveys exploring paediatric perspectives on adult-onset SLE remission targets. A modified nominal group technique was used to discuss, refine, and agree on the cSLE remission target criteria. RESULTS: The Task Force proposed two definitions of remission: 'cSLE clinical remission on steroids (cCR)' and 'cSLE clinical remission off steroids (cCR-0)'. The common criteria are: (1) Clinical-SLEDAI-2 K = 0; (2) PGA score < 0.5 (0-3 scale); (4) stable antimalarials, immunosuppressive, and biologic therapy (changes due to side-effects, adherence, weight, or when building up to target dose allowed). Criterion (3) in cCR is the prednisolone dose ≤0.1 mg/kg/day (maximum 5 mg/day), whereas in cCR-0 it is zero. CONCLUSIONS: cSLE definitions of remission have been proposed, maintaining sufficient alignment with the adult-SLE definition to facilitate life-course research.

The Blue Ribbon Committee II Report and Recommendations on Surgical Education and Training in the United States: 2024.

OBJECTIVE: An expert panel made recommendations to optimize surgical education and training based on the effects of contemporary challenges. BACKGROUND: The inaugural Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC I) proposed sweeping recommendations for surgical education and training in 2004. In light of those findings, a second BRC (BRC II) was convened to make recommendations to optimize surgical training considering the current landscape in medical education. METHODS: BRC II was a panel of 67 experts selected on the basis of experience and leadership in surgical education and training. It was organized into subcommittees which met virtually over the course of a year. They developed recommendations, along with the Steering Committee, based on areas of focus and then presented them to the entire BRC II. The Delphi method was chosen to obtain consensus, defined as ≥80% agreement among the panel. Cronbach α was computed to assess the internal consistency of 3 Delphi rounds. RESULTS: Of the 50 recommendations, 31 obtained consensus in the following aspects of surgical training (# of consensus recommendation/# of proposed): Workforce (1/5); Medical Student Education (3/8); Work Life Integration (4/6); Resident Education (5/7); Goals, Structure, and Financing of Training (5/8); Education Support and Faculty Development (5/6); Research Training (7/9); and Educational Technology and Assessment (1/1). The internal consistency was good in Rounds 1 and 2 and acceptable in Round 3. CONCLUSIONS: BRC II used the Delphi approach to identify and recommend 31 priorities for surgical education in 2024. We advise establishing a multidisciplinary surgical educational group to oversee, monitor, and facilitate implementation of these recommendations.

Defining a Framework and Evaluation Metrics for Sustainable Global Surgical Partnerships: A Modified Delphi Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use expert consensus to build a concrete and realistic framework and checklist to evaluate sustainability in global surgery partnerships (GSPs). BACKGROUND: Partnerships between high-resourced and low-resourced settings are often created to address the burden of unmet surgical need. Reflecting on the negative, unintended consequences of asymmetrical partnerships, global surgery community members have proposed frameworks and best practices to promote sustainable engagement between partners, though these frameworks lack consensus. This project proposes a cohesive, consensus-driven framework with accompanying evaluation metrics to guide sustainability in GSPs. METHODS: A modified Delphi technique with purposive sampling was used to build consensus on the definitions and associated evaluation metrics of previously proposed pillars (Stakeholder Engagement, Multidisciplinary Collaboration, Context-Relevant Education and Training, Bilateral Authorship, Multisource Funding, Outcome Measurement) of sustainable GSPs. RESULTS: Fifty global surgery experts from 34 countries with a median of 9.5 years of experience in the field of global surgery participated in 3 Delphi rounds. Consensus was achieved on the identity, definitions, and a 47-item checklist for the evaluation of the 6 pillars of sustainability in GSPs. In all, 29% of items achieved consensus in the first round, whereas 100% achieved consensus in the second and third rounds. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first framework for building sustainable GSPs using the input of experts from all World Health Organization regions. We hope this tool will help the global surgery community to find noncolonial solutions to addressing the gap in access to quality surgical care in low-resource settings.