Engaging Community in Prioritizing Outcomes to Improve Family Health in Evidence-Based Nurse Home Visiting: Using a Modified e-Delphi Method.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based home visiting programs are designed to improve maternal child health. Nurse-Family Partnership (NFP) is a model evidence-based home visiting program, shown to improve pregnancy outcomes, child development, and economic self-sufficiency for first-time mothers and their families experiencing social and economic adversities, enrolling them early in pregnancy. Recently, NFP has expanded its services to multiparous women (previous live births) and enrolling women past 28 weeks gestation (late registrants) in selected agencies in Florida since 2021. OBJECTIVE: To study the process and impacts of expanding NFP to expanded populations (multiparous and/or late registrants), we convened a diverse Advisory Committee to guide the NFP expansion evaluation in Florida. METHODS: This study employed a modified e-Delphi method with three rounds of data collection, to engage diverse partners to identify process and impact outcomes for the NFP expansion evaluation. RESULTS: Child maltreatment was identified as the highest priority outcome. Process outcomes included program reach, client enrollment, and client engagement, while impact outcomes included maternal physical health, maternal mental health and substance use, birth outcomes, and breastfeeding practices. The Advisory Committee further identified potential data sources to measure these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Identifying and selecting key process and impact outcomes using a community-engaged process is necessary to ensure equal buy-in from all partners and to inform rigorous program evaluation. This study showed that using methods such as e-Delphi is feasible and effective for achieving thoughtful and rigorous decision-making, even in times of uncertainty like the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Core values and competencies of public health nurses: A Delphi survey].

Objectives　This study aimed to clarify the core values and competencies of public health nurses (PHNs) who contribute to improve health issues in transitioning societies, based on a consensus among PHN-related organizations, including practitioners and education researchers.Methods　A draft defining the core values and competencies of PHNs was developed through five consultation sessions with 20 executives and nominees of organizations in each area of PHN practice, education, and research to collect, categorize, and refine the items. The expert panel comprised 534 nominees from six PHN-related organizations, and three rounds of Delphi surveys were conducted. The consensus criteria were ≥70% for agreement and ≥80% for firm agreement.Results　In the first round, 272 expert panel nominees (50.9%) responded, and 217 responded in all rounds. The draft was revised based on the feedback from each round. By round 3, >90% agreed on the core value and competency frameworks and definitions.Conclusion　The Delphi survey revealed the three core value frameworks and definitions of "social justice in health," "human rights and autonomy," and "health and safety" and eight core competencies of "professional autonomy and responsibility," "scientific research and use of information science and technology," "population-based assessment and analysis," "practices for health enhancement and prevention," "building systems to improve public health," "management of healthy community development," "person/community-centered collaboration and cooperation," and "communication for consensus and solutions," with a firm agreement. Eventually, these frameworks would be the bases for creating national standards of practice, education, and research to satisfy the consensus levels of PHNs and PHN-related organizations.

Establishing the content validity of a new emergency department patient-reported experience measure (ED PREM): a Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported experience measures aim to capture the patient's perspective of what happened during a care encounter and how it happened. However, due to a lack of guidance to support patient-reported experience measure development and reporting, the content validity of many instruments is unclear and ambiguous. Thus, the aim of this study was to establish the content validity of a newly developed Emergency Department Patient-Reported Experience Measure (ED PREM). METHODS: ED PREM items were developed based on the findings of a systematic mixed studies review, and qualitative interviews with Emergency Department patients that occurred during September and October, 2020. Individuals who participated in the qualitative interviews were approached again during August 2021 to participate in the ED PREM content validation study. The preliminary ED PREM comprised 37 items. A two-round modified, online Delphi study was undertaken where patient participants were asked to rate the clarity, relevance, and importance of ED PREM items on a 4-point content validity index scale. Each round lasted for two-weeks, with 1 week in between for analysis. Consensus was a priori defined as item-level content validity index scores of ≥0.80. A scale-level content validity index score was also calculated. RESULTS: Fifteen patients participated in both rounds of the online Delphi study. At the completion of the study, two items were dropped and 13 were revised, resulting in a 35-item ED PREM. The scale-level content validity index score for the final 35-item instrument was 0.95. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed ED PREM demonstrates good content validity and aligns strongly with the concept of Emergency Department patient experience as described in the literature. The ED PREM will next be administered in a larger study to establish its' construct validity and reliability. There is an imperative for clear guidance on PREM content validation methodologies. Thus, this study may inform the efforts of other researchers undertaking PREM content validation.

A Risk Management Perspective on Climate Change: Lessons Learned from the Nuclear Industry.

Despite the widely acknowledged role of the anthropogenic drivers of climate change, there has been little success in developing a clear overview of the strengths and weaknesses of counter-measures or developing a consensus on their application. Problems with conventional approaches arise from the strongly coupled, multidisciplinary issues involved and the long timescales (centuries or more) over which some key processes operate. Here we outline an alternative approach based on experience gained in risk assessment for an area with similar challenges-the geological disposal of radioactive waste. Utilization of such risk assessment approaches and tools to facilitate a holistic, top-down synthesis of the interactions between the key features, events and processes driving climate change and constraining responses to it, are illustrated. We especially focus on visual presentations that encourage dialog between both specialists and non-technical stakeholders. These can thus form a basis to assist balancing responses in terms of energy policy, modified socio-economic boundary conditions and environmental management.

How to specify healthcare process improvements collaboratively using rapid, remote consensus-building: a framework and a case study of its application.

BACKGROUND: Practical methods for facilitating process improvement are needed to support high quality, safe care. How best to specify (identify and define) process improvements - the changes that need to be made in a healthcare process - remains a key question. Methods for doing so collaboratively, rapidly and remotely offer much potential, but are under-developed. We propose an approach for engaging diverse stakeholders remotely in a consensus-building exercise to help specify improvements in a healthcare process, and we illustrate the approach in a case study. METHODS: Organised in a five-step framework, our proposed approach is informed by a participatory ethos, crowdsourcing and consensus-building methods: (1) define scope and objective of the process improvement; (2) produce a draft or prototype of the proposed process improvement specification; (3) identify participant recruitment strategy; (4) design and conduct a remote consensus-building exercise; (5) produce a final specification of the process improvement in light of learning from the exercise. We tested the approach in a case study that sought to specify process improvements for the management of obstetric emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a brief video showing a process for managing a post-partum haemorrhage in women with COVID-19 to elicit recommendations on how the process could be improved. Two Delphi rounds were then conducted to reach consensus. RESULTS: We gathered views from 105 participants, with a background in maternity care (n = 36), infection prevention and control (n = 17), or human factors (n = 52). The participants initially generated 818 recommendations for how to improve the process illustrated in the video, which we synthesised into a set of 22 recommendations. The consensus-building exercise yielded a final set of 16 recommendations. These were used to inform the specification of process improvements for managing the obstetric emergency and develop supporting resources, including an updated video. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed methodological approach enabled the expertise and ingenuity of diverse stakeholders to be captured and mobilised to specify process improvements in an area of pressing service need. This approach has the potential to address current challenges in process improvement, but will require further evaluation.

Impact of Leadership and Mobility on Consensus-Building in Sensor Networks.

Introducing leadership and mobility is known to benefit wireless sensor networks in terms of consensus-building and collective decision-making. However, these benefits are neither analytically proven nor quantified in the literature. This paper fills this gap by investigating the mobility dynamics in wireless sensor networks analytically. The results of the analytical investigation are presented as a set of theorems and their proofs. This paper also establishes a natural synergy between the leader-follower model and its bipartite graph representation. It demonstrates the advantages of the leader-follower model for consensus-building over others in terms of improved convergence rate. It presents a strategy for choosing leaders from among the agents participating in the consensus-building process using the well-known graph-coloring solution. Then, it shows how the leader-follower model helps improve the convergence rate of consensus-building. Finally, it shows that the convergence rate of the consensus-building process can be further improved by making the leaders mobile.

Defining Human Disturbance to Shorebirds Using Manager and Scientist Input.

Shorebird researchers and land managers recognize human disturbance as a serious threat facing shorebirds. Yet, a common understanding of what defines human disturbance is lacking. To address this issue, we employed the Delphi technique, an iterative consensus-building social science method, to bring scientists and managers together to develop a shared definition of human disturbance and a list of priority human activities that could affect migratory shorebirds. During four iterative rounds, participants with extensive knowledge on human disturbance to shorebirds from varying geographic locations within the Northeastern U.S. worked together to produce a shared understanding. Through analyzing participants' open-ended responses, we identified important themes for the definition. The participants then refined and ranked these themes through surveys, and the top-ranked themes were used to draft a final definition also reviewed by the participants. Participants provided 94 human activities in response to our request to list and describe all potential human disturbances that affect shorebirds during fall migration. From there, we grouped the activities into 23 categories. Through rating and ranking tasks, participants reduced this list to 12 priority disturbance categories that represent the perceived most significant human disturbances in the Northeastern United States. We also compared responses among the different participant groups (i.e., managers, scientists, and manager/scientists), finding that groups' responses generally did not significantly differ. While nearly all participants were satisfied with the process, we provide some suggestions to improve it. The outputs of the Delphi technique have informed a best practices guidance document for shorebird management.

Reflective Consensus Building on Wicked Problems with the Reflect! Platform.

Wicked problems-that is, problems that can be framed in a number of different ways, depending on who is looking at them-pose ethical challenges for professionals that have scarcely been recognized as such. Even though wicked problems are all around us, they are rarely addressed in education. A reason for this failure might be that wicked problems pose almost insurmountable challenges in educational settings. This contribution shows how students can learn to cope with wicked problems in problem-based learning projects that are structured by the Reflect! platform.

Creating consensus-based practice guidelines with 2000 nurses.

Medical professionals follow evidence-based practice guidelines to achieve effective patient outcomes. Traditionally, to develop guidelines, a small group of experts examine evidence then agree on a set of statements, which are then published in journals. However, more than 7000 primary care journal articles are published monthly. This study examined a different way of drawing up practice guidelines, which involved large numbers of nurses from different countries directly in developing then disseminating the guidelines to speed up acceptance and the implementation of best practice. The results were consensus-based best practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with ostomies, which have received a high level of acceptance and enthusiasm from practitioners in 27 countries.

Consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the OMERACT Core Outcome Set for shared decision making interventions in rheumatology trials.

OBJECTIVE: To gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials evaluating shared decision making (SDM) interventions. METHODS: Following the OMERACT Handbook methods, our Working Group (WG), comprised of 90 members, including 17 patient research partners (PRPs) and 73 clinicians and researchers, had six virtual meetings in addition to email exchanges to develop draft definitions and descriptions. The WG then conducted an international survey of its members to gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions. Finally, the WG members had virtual meetings and e-mail exchanges to review survey results and finalize names, definitions and descriptions of the domains. RESULTS: WG members contributed to developing the definitions. Fifty-two members representing four continents and 13 countries completed the survey, including 15 PRPs, 33 clinicians and 37 researchers. PRPs and clinicians/researchers agreed with all definitions and descriptions with agreements ranging from 87% to 100%. Respondents suggested wording changes to the names, definitions and descriptions to better reflect the domains. Discussions led to further simplification and clarification to address common questions/concerns about the domains. CONCLUSION: Our WG reached consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the core domain set for rheumatology trials of SDM interventions. This step is crucial to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The current study provides consensus-based definitions and descriptions for the domains of the OMERACT core domain set for shared decision making interventions from patients/caregivers, clinicians and researchers. This is a crucial step to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set for trials of SDM interventions.

Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? The costs of consensus-building in Local Agenda 21.

Is local participation always optimal for sustainable action? Here, Local Agenda 21 is a relevant case as it broadly calls for consensus-building among stakeholders. Consensus-building is, however, costly. We show that the costs of making local decisions are likely to rapidly exceed the benefits. Why? Because as the number of participants grows, the more likely it is that the group will include individuals who have an extreme position and are unwilling to make compromises. Thus, the net gain of self-organization should be compared with those of its alternatives, for example voting, market-solutions, or not making any choices at all. Even though the informational value of meetings may be helpful to policy makers, the model shows that it also decreases as the number of participants increase. Overall, the result is a thought provoking scenario for Local Agenda 21 as it highlights the risk of less sustainable action in the future.

Toward a more comprehensive understanding of organizational influences on implementation: the organization theory for implementation science framework.

Introduction: Implementation is influenced by factors beyond individual clinical settings. Nevertheless, implementation research often focuses on factors related to individual providers and practices, potentially due to limitations of available frameworks. Extant frameworks do not adequately capture the myriad organizational influences on implementation. Organization theories capture diverse organizational influences but remain underused in implementation science. To advance their use among implementation scientists, we distilled 70 constructs from nine organization theories identified in our previous work into theoretical domains in the Organization Theory for Implementation Science (OTIS) framework. Methods: The process of distilling organization theory constructs into domains involved concept mapping and iterative consensus-building. First, we recruited organization and implementation scientists to participate in an online concept mapping exercise in which they sorted organization theory constructs into domains representing similar theoretical concepts. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to produce visual representations (clusters) of the relationships among constructs in concept maps. Second, to interpret concept maps, we engaged members of the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) OTIS workgroup in consensus-building discussions. Results: Twenty-four experts participated in concept mapping. Based on resulting construct groupings' coherence, OTIS workgroup members selected the 10-cluster solution (from options of 7-13 clusters) and then reorganized clusters in consensus-building discussions to increase coherence. This process yielded six final OTIS domains: organizational characteristics (e.g., size; age); governance and operations (e.g., organizational and social subsystems); tasks and processes (e.g., technology cycles; excess capacity); knowledge and learning (e.g., tacit knowledge; sense making); characteristics of a population of organizations (e.g., isomorphism; selection pressure); and interorganizational relationships (e.g., dominance; interdependence). Discussion: Organizational influences on implementation are poorly understood, in part due to the limitations of extant frameworks. To improve understanding of organizational influences on implementation, we distilled 70 constructs from nine organization theories into six domains. Applications of the OTIS framework will enhance understanding of organizational influences on implementation, promote theory-driven strategies for organizational change, improve understanding of mechanisms underlying relationships between OTIS constructs and implementation, and allow for framework refinement. Next steps include testing the OTIS framework in implementation research and adapting it for use among policymakers and practitioners.

Political reconfiguration in the social space: data analysis and future perspective.

This paper aims to explore the complex and sometimes controversial relationship between social media and politics. The correlation between these two areas of research has always been less linear than a simplistic narrative might suggest, mainly because of the involvement of different scientific disciplines, such as sociology, political science, communication, social psychology and computer science. The decision to explore this topic is motivated by the persistent relevance of social media platforms in the current era. This growing centrality is also due to the accelerated digitization process that occurred during the pandemic phase in the digital ecosystem. In particular, the pandemic has contributed to a significant evolution of the concept of social networks. The methodology used is based on secondary data, and the work seeks to highlight the expansion of digital space resulting from the shift from a simple place of interaction to a digital space that reconfigured the mobilization and political action of Campania's governor Vincenzo De Luca. In conclusion, the study reveals important findings on the president's use of social media. For example, active citizen engagement strategies through direct interaction, timely information sharing, and mobilization of online resources are evident. Therefore, it becomes necessary to ask and understand whether the potential of new social technologies is being used to cultivate critical and massive citizen participation in democratic processes or whether it is being distorted for the sole purpose of increasing or consolidating consent.

International Variability in Spinal Metastasis Treatment: A Survey of the AO Spine Community.

STUDY DESIGN: International survey. OBJECTIVES: To assess variability in the treatment practices for spinal metastases as a function of practice setting, surgical specialty, and fellowship training among an international group of spine surgeons. METHODS: An anonymous internet-based survey was disseminated to the AO Spine membership. The questionnaire contained items on practice settings, fellowship training, indications used for spinal metastasis surgery, surgical strategies, multidisciplinary team use, and postoperative follow-up priorities and practice. RESULTS: 341 gave complete responses to the survey with 76.3% identifying spinal oncology as a practice focus and 95.6% treating spinal metastases. 80% use the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) to guide instrumentation decision-making and 60.7% recruit multidisciplinary teams for some or all cases. Priorities for postoperative follow-up are adjuvant radiotherapy (80.9%) and systemic therapy (74.8%). Most schedule first follow-up within 6 weeks of surgery (62.2%). Significant response heterogeneity was seen when stratifying by practice in an academic or university-affiliated center, practice in a cancer center, completion of a spine oncology fellowship, and self-identification as a tumor specialist. Respondents belonging to any of these categories were more likely to utilize SINS (P < .01-.02), recruit assistance from plastic surgeons (all P < .01), and incorporate radiation oncologists in postoperative care (P < .01-.03). CONCLUSIONS: The largest variability in practice strategies is based upon practice setting, spine tumor specialization, and completion of a spine oncology fellowship. These respondents were more likely to use evidenced-based practices. However, the response variability indicates the need for consensus building, particularly for postoperative spine metastasis care pathways and multidisciplinary team use.

IsletSwipe, a mobile platform for expert opinion exchange on islet graft images.

We previously developed a deep learning-based web service (IsletNet) for an automated counting of isolated pancreatic islets. The neural network training is limited by the absent consensus on the ground truth annotations. Here, we present a platform (IsletSwipe) for an exchange of graphical opinions among experts to facilitate the consensus formation. The platform consists of a web interface and a mobile application. In a small pilot study, we demonstrate the functionalities and the use case scenarios of the platform. Nine experts from three centers validated the drawing tools, tested precision and consistency of the expert contour drawing, and evaluated user experience. Eight experts from two centers proceeded to evaluate additional images to demonstrate the following two use case scenarios. The Validation scenario involves an automated selection of images and islets for the expert scrutiny. It is scalable (more experts, images, and islets may readily be added) and can be applied to independent validation of islet contours from various sources. The Inquiry scenario serves the ground truth generating expert in seeking assistance from peers to achieve consensus on challenging cases during the preparation for IsletNet training. This scenario is limited to a small number of manually selected images and islets. The experts gained an opportunity to influence IsletNet training and to compare other experts' opinions with their own. The ground truth-generating expert obtained feedback for future IsletNet training. IsletSwipe is a suitable tool for the consensus finding. Experts from additional centers are welcome to participate.

Developing a National Set of Health Equity Indicators Using a Consensus Building Process.

BACKGROUND: Considerable health inequities documented in Israel between communities, populations and regions, undermine the rights of all citizens to optimal health. The first step towards health equity is agreement on a set of national indicators, reflecting equity in healthcare provision and health outcomes, and allowing monitoring of the impact of interventions on the reduction of disparities. We describe the process of reaching a consensus on a defined set of national equity indicators. METHODS: The study was conducted between January 2019 and June 2020, in a multistage design: (A) Identifying appropriate and available inequity measures via interviews with stakeholders. (B) Agreement on the screening criteria (public health importance; gap characteristics; potential for change; public interest) and relative weighting. (C) Constructing the consultation framework as an online, 3-round Delphi technique, with a range of experts recruited from the health, welfare and education sectors. RESULTS: Participants were of diverse age, gender, geographic location, religion and ethnicity, and came from academia, healthcare provision, government ministries and patient representative groups. Thirty measures of inequity, presented to participants, represented the following domains: Health promotion (11 indicators), acute and chronic morbidity (11), life expectancy and mortality (2), health infrastructures and affordability of care (4), education and employment (2). Of the 77 individuals contacted, 75 (97%) expressed willingness to participate, and 55 (73%) completed all three scoring rounds. The leading ten indicators were: Diabetes care, childhood obesity, adult obesity, distribution of healthcare personnel, fatal childhood injuries, cigarette smoking, infant mortality, ability to afford care, access to psychotherapy and distribution of hospital beds. Agreement among raters, measured as intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), was 0.75. CONCLUSION: A diverse range of consultants reached a consensus on the most important national equity indicators, including both clinical and system indicators. Results should be used to guide governmental decision-making and inter-sectoral strategies, furthering the pursuit of a more equitable healthcare system.

The future of value-based emergency care: Development of an emergency medicine MIPS value pathway framework.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) to accelerate the transition of physician payment toward value-based care models and away from traditional fee-for-service payment programs. In recent years, CMS has sought to modify the program by developing a MIPS Value Pathway (MVP) framework intended to use existing and future physician quality and cost measures to reward value-based care delivery. This article describes the multi-step process of the MVP Task Force, convened by the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) to develop an emergency medicine-specific MVP proposal informed by diverse stakeholder perceptions regarding: (1) which existing quality measures reflect high quality emergency care, and (2) the degree to which emergency clinicians can impact clinical outcomes and cost for the care domains captured by existing quality measures. The MVP Task Force synthesized stakeholder feedback and underwent a consensus-building approach to develop the "Adopting Best Practices and Promoting Patient Safety within Emergency Medicine" MVP, recently reviewed and approved by CMS for national implementation starting in 2023. Our process and findings have broad implications for clinicians, administrators, and policymakers navigating the continued transition to value-based care in conjunction with CMS's implementation of the MVP framework.

Consensus Definition of Misophonia: A Delphi Study.

Misophonia is a disorder of decreased tolerance to specific sounds or their associated stimuli that has been characterized using different language and methodologies. The absence of a common understanding or foundational definition of misophonia hinders progress in research to understand the disorder and develop effective treatments for individuals suffering from misophonia. From June 2020 through January 2021, the authors conducted a study to determine whether a committee of experts with diverse expertise related to misophonia could develop a consensus definition of misophonia. An expert committee used a modified Delphi method to evaluate candidate definitional statements that were identified through a systematic review of the published literature. Over four rounds of iterative voting, revision, and exclusion, the committee made decisions to include, exclude, or revise these statements in the definition based on the currently available scientific and clinical evidence. A definitional statement was included in the final definition only after reaching consensus at 80% or more of the committee agreeing with its premise and phrasing. The results of this rigorous consensus-building process were compiled into a final definition of misophonia that is presented here. This definition will serve as an important step to bring cohesion to the growing field of researchers and clinicians who seek to better understand and support individuals experiencing misophonia.

Two different invitation approaches for consecutive rounds of a Delphi survey led to comparable final outcome.

OBJECTIVES: There are two different approaches to involve participants in consecutive rounds of a Delphi survey: (1) invitation to every round independent of response to the previous round ("all-rounds") and (2) invitation only when responded to the previous round ("respondents-only"). This study aimed to investigate the effect of invitation approach on the response rate and final outcome of a Delphi survey. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Both experts (N = 188) and patients (N = 188) took part in a Delphi survey to update the core outcome set (COS) for axial spondyloarthritis. A study with 1:1 allocation to two experimental groups (ie, "all-rounds" [N = 187] and "respondents-only" [N = 189]) was built-in. RESULTS: The overall response rate was lower in the "respondents-only group" (46%) compared to the "all-rounds group" (61%). All domains that were selected for inclusion in the COS by the "respondents-only group" were also selected by the "all-rounds group." Additionally, the four most important domains were identical between groups after the final round, with only minor differences in the other domains. CONCLUSION: Inviting panel members who missed a round to a subsequent round will lead to a better representation of opinions of the originally invited panel and reduces the chance of false consensus, while it does not influence the final outcome of the Delphi.

Expert Consensus to Finalize a Universal Evaluator Rubric to Assess Pharmacy Students' Patient Communication Skills.

Objective. To use an expert consensus-building process to develop a rubric used by multiple evaluator types to assess Doctor of Pharmacy students' patient communication skills.Methods. Faculty and staff members from six schools and colleges of pharmacy collaborated on a multi-step expert consensus-building process to create the final version of a communication rubric. First, faculty and patient content experts evaluated each item in the rubric for its relevance, criticality, and global comprehensiveness using a five-point Likert scale (0=not at all, 4=to a high extent). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the resulting data. Faculty members evaluated the results and came to a consensus on the second version of the rubric. A corresponding codebook was developed and refined through a two-phase process.Results. The initial communication rubric was evaluated by 13 expert reviewers. Mean global comprehensiveness on the rubric was 3.83 for faculty experts and 3.5 for patient experts. After evaluating results from the expert consensus-building process, 14 items on the rubric did not change, five items were revised, three items were removed, and two items were added. The second version of the instrument included 20 items in six topic areas. A codebook was finalized to increase scoring consistency for the 20 communication items.Conclusion. Overall, content experts concluded that the rubric had high global comprehensiveness. Collaboration involving faculty members from multiple schools of pharmacy resulted in a 20-item communication rubric and codebook that can be used to increase consistency in scoring student pharmacists' patient communication skills.