TRIPLE C reporting principles for case study evaluations of the role of context in complex interventions.

BACKGROUND: Guidance and reporting principles such as CONSORT (for randomised trials) and PRISMA (for systematic reviews) have greatly improved the reporting, discoverability, transparency and consistency of published research. We sought to develop similar guidance for case study evaluations undertaken to explore the influence of context on the processes and outcomes of complex interventions. METHODS: A range of experts were recruited to an online Delphi panel, sampling for maximum diversity in disciplines (e.g. public health, health services research, organisational studies), settings (e.g. country), and sectors (e.g. academic, policy, third sector). To inform panel deliberations, we prepared background materials based on: [a] a systematic meta-narrative review of empirical and methodological literatures on case study, context and complex interventions; [b] the collective experience of a network of health systems and public health researchers; and [c] the established RAMESES II standards (which cover one kind of case study). We developed a list of topics and issues based on these sources and encouraged panel members to provide free text comments. Their feedback informed development of a set of items in the form of questions for potential inclusion in the reporting principles. We circulated these by email, asking panel members to rank each potential item twice (for relevance and validity) on a 7-point Likert scale. This sequence was repeated twice. RESULTS: We recruited 51 panel members from 50 organisations across 12 countries, who brought experience of a range of case study research methods and applications. 26 completed all three Delphi rounds, reaching over 80% consensus on 16 items covering title, abstract, definitions of terms, philosophical assumptions, research question(s), rationale, how context and complexity relates to the intervention, ethical approval, empirical methods, findings, use of theory, generalisability and transferability, researcher perspective and influence, conclusions and recommendations, and funding and conflicts of interest. CONCLUSION: The 'Triple C' (Case study, Context, Complex interventions) reporting principles recognise that case studies are undertaken in different ways for different purposes and based on different philosophical assumptions. They are designed to be enabling rather than prescriptive, and to make case study evaluation reporting on context and complex health interventions more comprehensive, accessible and useable.

Applying the Delphi Approach to Prioritize Social Factors Affecting the Development of Children Under Six Years.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health have a key role in the growth and development of children, particularly in early childhood which is mentioned from infancy to the age of six years old. These factors might cause disparities in living conditions and consequently bring about inequities regarding different aspects of development such as emotional, psychological, social, psychological, and intellectual. This research aimed to provide a model for prioritizing social factors affecting the development of children under six years. METHODS: We used quantitative-qualitative (mixed) method to perform data analysis. The statistical population included 12 medical experts and professionals in the field of children's development and social determinants of health that were selected using the snowball method. In the quantitative section, a Delphi technique was applied to screen the extracted indicators. Then through applying a decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method, the cause-and-effect interactions among main social determinants were identified. To analyze data, super decision software was used. RESULTS: According to literature review and the results obtained from focus group discussions, five dimensions including individual factors, family factors, environmental factors, governance, and global factors were identified. Based on the study findings, the criterion of "family factors" was mentioned as the most important priority affecting childhood development. Furthermore, the sub-criterion of "International Programs and Policies" received the greatest priority among other sub-criteria with a profound impact on children's healthy growth and development. CONCLUSION: Despite the current knowledge about social determinants of health, it is required to identify the most influential socioeconomic factors on childhood development. In such a manner, political strategies for improving the health condition of children can be implemented based on scientific evidence. Due to the crucial role of family factors, environmental factors and other socio-economic conditions, health policy makers and public health practitioners should be informed of the importance of these factors in shaping the health condition of children.

Pathways for adapting tourism to climate change in an urban destination - Evidences based on thermal conditions for the Porto Metropolitan Area (Portugal).

The narrative of sustainable tourism transition in a context of adaptation to climate change is very relevant internationally. The availability and sharing of knowledge and information is a basic requirement for the successful planning of the tourism sector regarding this phenomenon. Planning adaptation in the urban tourism sector is widely regarded as a collectively-based process. However, collaborative planning is far from being the standard. This study reports the results of a Modified Delphi Approach (MDA) among experts about the future of urban tourism in a context of adaptation to climate change in Porto Metropolitan Area (Portugal), considering the outdoor thermal conditions perspective. Using an expert panel, the study gathered their opinions to analyze the degrees of responsibility of the main sectorial entities at different territorial levels, the conditions of action in the transformation agenda and the measures to be implemented in the adaptation and mitigation process - according to priority and time horizon. Two rounds were carried out to apply the methodology between January and April 2021. The first questionnaire had the participation of 47 professionals. 34 out of the 47 professionals of the 1st round participated in the second questionnaire. The evidence from different stakeholders demonstrates that there is an ambiguous process of understanding the problem, information needs, and a weak interaction between actors - resources - tasks. The effectiveness and efficiency of collaborative planning and outlined goals by 2050 for adaptation of urban tourism sector to climate change can be hampered. Experts consider the creation of structural (tangible) measures to be fundamental. Among other results, it was found that most participants consider that the intervention is dependent on the guidelines issued by the government and municipal councils when it comes to defining a proposal for adapting the urban tourism sector to climate change. Despite this, the options for more sustainable practices must be based on three axes: (i) solutions based on the energy sector in the hotel industry (e.g., energy certification, prioritization of the use of renewable energy); (ii) improvement and expansion of green infrastructure for tourist enjoyment [e.g., creation of green areas (small additional pockets), namely in the center of Porto; and pedestrianization of central areas of the city] and (iii) network participation through the collaboration of various stakeholders with relevance in tourism and urban planning.

Lists of potential diagnoses that final-year medical students need to consider: a modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Contrastive learning is known to be effective in teaching medical students how to generate diagnostic hypotheses in clinical reasoning. However, there is no international consensus on lists of diagnostic considerations across different medical disciplines regarding the common signs and symptoms that should be learned as part of the undergraduate medical curriculum. In Japan, the national model core curriculum for undergraduate medical education was revised in 2016, and lists of potential diagnoses for 37 common signs, symptoms, and pathophysiology were introduced into the curriculum. This study aimed to validate the list of items based on expert consensus. METHODS: The authors used a modified Delphi method to develop consensus among a panel of 23 expert physician-teachers in clinical reasoning from across Japan. The panel evaluated the items on a 5-point Likert scale, based on whether a disease should be hypothesized by final-year medical students considering given signs, symptoms, or pathophysiology. They also added other diseases that should be hypothesized. A positive consensus was defined as both a 75% rate of panel agreement and a mean of 4 or higher with a standard deviation of less than 1 on the 5-point scale. The study was conducted between September 2017 and March 2018. RESULTS: This modified Delphi study identified 275 basic and 67 essential other than basic items corresponding to the potential diagnoses for 37 common signs, symptoms, and pathophysiology that Japanese medical students should master before graduation. CONCLUSIONS: The lists developed in the study can be useful for teaching and learning how to generate initial hypotheses by encouraging students' contrastive learning. Although they were focused on the Japanese educational context, the lists and process of validation are generalizable to other countries for building national consensus on the content of medical education curricula.

A guideline for the prevention and management of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) is a public health problem globally, with South Africa having the highest recorded prevalence of all countries. Government programmes to prevent and manage FASD remain limited because of the lack of a specific policy. Herein, we developed a guideline to inform policy on the prevention and management of FASD in South Africa. METHODS: We applied a modified version of the World Health Organization's approach to guideline development in three phases. In the first phase, we designed the initial guideline prototype. To do this, we conducted an in-depth interview with policymakers and a focus group with relevant service providers on policy requirements for FASD, a document review of policies on FASD and a scoping review of various interventions for FASD. In phase 2, we refined the initially formulated guideline prototype through a discursive approach with seven local and international experts on FASD. Phase 3 involved refining the prototype using a modified Delphi approach. Forty-three and forty-one experts participated in rounds 1 and 2 of the Delphi approach, respectively. The acceptable consensus for each included policy statement was 85%. RESULTS: We identified three aspects of the proposed guideline, which are the approaches and guiding principles, the prevention measures and the management measures. The guideline proposes that a FASD policy should consider lifespan needs, be culturally diverse, collaborative, evidence-based, multi-sectoral and address social determinants of health contributing to FASD. The essential components of FASD prevention policy consist of awareness and education of the dangers of drinking alcohol, access to treatment for alcohol problems and training of service providers. The management components include capacity building related to diagnosis, educating parents regarding the needs and management, appropriate referral pathways, training of teachers regarding classroom management and support for parents and individuals with FASD. CONCLUSION: FASD in South Africa deserves urgent attention. Developing a specific policy to guide programmes could enhance and coordinate the efforts towards preventing and managing FASD. The guideline has the potential to assist policymakers in the development of a comprehensive and multi-sectoral policy for prevention and management of FASD, considering the consensus obtained from the experts.

Harnessing the power of clinician judgement. Identifying risk of deteriorating and dying in people with a haematological malignancy: A Delphi study.

AIM: To provide expert consensus on the clinical indicators that signal a person with a haematological malignancy is at high risk of deteriorating and dying. BACKGROUND: Identification of people who are at risk of deteriorating and dying is essential to facilitate patient autonomy, appropriate treatment decisions, and effective end-of-life care. DESIGN: A three-step modified Delphi approach. METHODS: The study was conducted over 6 months (September 2015-March 2016) to gather opinion from an international panel of experts (N = 27) on the clinical indicators that signal a person with a haematological malignancy is at high risk of deteriorating and dying. The first round was informed by a systematic review of prognostic factors present in the final months of life for people with a haematological malignancy. Consensus was achieved if 70% of responses fell within two points on a seven-point Likert-type scale. FINDINGS: Consensus was achieved on the following 11 clinical indicators: (a) advancing age; (b) declining performances status; (c) presence of co-morbidities; (d) disease status; (e) persistent infections (bacterial and viral); (f) fungal infections; (g) severe graft versus host disease; (h) requiring high care; (i) signs of frailty; (j) treatment limitations; and (k) anorexia and/or weight loss. Consensus was also achieved on associated themes and statements for each indicator. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that subjective clinician-assessed indicators that are contextually relevant to the nature of haematological malignancies are markers of risk. This study has provided valuable preliminary findings on the topic and will inform future research.

Biosphere reserves: Attributes for success.

Biosphere reserves established under the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Program aim to harmonise biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Concerns over the extent to which the reserve network was living up to this ideal led to the development of a new strategy in 1995 (the Seville Strategy) to enhance the operation of the network of reserves. An evaluation of effectiveness of management of the biosphere reserve network was called for as part of this strategy. Expert opinion was assembled through a Delphi Process to identify successful and less successful reserves and investigate common factors influencing success or failure. Ninety biosphere reserves including sixty successful and thirty less successful reserves in 42 countries across all five Man and the Biosphere Program regions were identified. Most successful sites are the post-Seville generation while the majority of unsuccessful sites are pre-Seville that are managed as national parks and have not been amended to conform to the characteristics that are meant to define a biosphere reserve. Stakeholder participation and collaboration, governance, finance and resources, management, and awareness and communication are the most influential factors in the success or failure of the biosphere reserves. For success, the biosphere reserve concept needs to be clearly understood and applied through landscape zoning. Designated reserves then need a management system with inclusive good governance, strong participation and collaboration, adequate finance and human resource allocation and stable and responsible management and implementation. All rather obvious but it is difficult to achieve without commitment to the biosphere reserve concept by the governance authorities.

RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Realist evaluation is increasingly used in health services and other fields of research and evaluation. No previous standards exist for reporting realist evaluations. This standard was developed as part of the RAMESES II project. The project's aim is to produce initial reporting standards for realist evaluations. METHODS: We purposively recruited a maximum variety sample of an international group of experts in realist evaluation to our online Delphi panel. Panel members came from a variety of disciplines, sectors and policy fields. We prepared the briefing materials for our Delphi panel by summarising the most recent literature on realist evaluations to identify how and why rigour had been demonstrated and where gaps in expertise and rigour were evident. We also drew on our collective experience as realist evaluators, in training and supporting realist evaluations, and on the RAMESES email list to help us develop the briefing materials. Through discussion within the project team, we developed a list of issues related to quality that needed to be addressed when carrying out realist evaluations. These were then shared with the panel members and their feedback was sought. Once the panel members had provided their feedback on our briefing materials, we constructed a set of items for potential inclusion in the reporting standards and circulated these online to panel members. Panel members were asked to rank each potential item twice on a 7-point Likert scale, once for relevance and once for validity. They were also encouraged to provide free text comments. RESULTS: We recruited 35 panel members from 27 organisations across six countries from nine different disciplines. Within three rounds our Delphi panel was able to reach consensus on 20 items that should be included in the reporting standards for realist evaluations. The overall response rates for all items for rounds 1, 2 and 3 were 94 %, 76 % and 80 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: These reporting standards for realist evaluations have been developed by drawing on a range of sources. We hope that these standards will lead to greater consistency and rigour of reporting and make realist evaluation reports more accessible, usable and helpful to different stakeholders.

Testing an Adapted Modified Delphi Method: Synthesizing Multiple Stakeholder Ratings of Health Care Service Effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act incentivizes health systems for better meeting patient needs, but often guidance about patient preferences for particular health services is limited. All too often vulnerable patient populations are excluded from these decision-making settings. A community-based participatory approach harnesses the in-depth knowledge of those experiencing barriers to health care. METHOD: We made three modifications to the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method, a modified Delphi approach, involving patients, adding an advisory council group to characterize existing knowledge in this little studied area, and using effectiveness rather than "appropriateness" as the basis for rating. As a proof of concept, we tested this method by examining the broadly delivered but understudied nonmedical services that community health centers provide. RESULTS: This method created discrete, new knowledge about these services by defining 6 categories and 112 unique services and by prioritizing among these services based on effectiveness using a 9-point scale. Consistent with the appropriateness method, we found statistical convergence of ratings among the panelists. DISCUSSION: Challenges include time commitment and adherence to a clear definition of effectiveness of services. This diverse stakeholder engagement method efficiently addresses gaps in knowledge about the effectiveness of health care services to inform population health management.

Milestones and entrustable professional activities: The key to practically translating competencies for interprofessional education?

Competency-based education and practice have become foundational for developing interprofessional education (IPE) and interprofessional collaboration. There has been a plethora of competencies developed in these areas recently, both at individual institutions and nationally; however, their effective integration and thus potential has not been fully realized educationally. Milestones and entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are new concepts and assessment approaches from medical education that provide a way to functionally use and maximize competencies to ensure that competency is attained. They are applicable to learning activities both within the classroom and the clinic, as well as to lifelong learning. This paper defines and describes milestones and EPAs, considers the importance of their application to IPE, and summarizes a future research project that will identify EPAs for an IPE curriculum.

When is enough enough? Developing consensus of definition of failure of immune tolerance induction in patients with haemophilia and inhibitors.

Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the preferred management of haemophilia A patients who develop high titre inhibitors against factor VIII. However, the optimal ITI regimen, predictors of ITI outcome and definitions of successful and unsuccessful ITI remain unclear. The aim of this project was to develop a consensus on the definition of ITI treatment failure for Australian clinical practice using a modified Delphi approach. Three consecutive surveys were distributed to the directors of 17 haemophilia treatment centres in Australia. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with definitions of ITI treatment failure generated from a literature review. Thirty-five statements regarding ITI achieved consensus (majority agree or strongly agree) during the three survey rounds. After round 3, four statements achieved majority disagreement, and for two statements no consensus was reached. Our study demonstrates that clinicians in Australia necessitate an arbitrary time to assess ITI failure, but that clinical outcomes of ITI are important in assessing response. Assessment over any 3- to 6-month period without a 20% reduction in inhibitor titre is suggestive of failure, but a reduction in bleeding phenotype alone may be sufficient to continue ITI. Overall, a period of 3 or 5 years of ITI may be required to determine response to ITI. Documentation of improvement in clinical measures, supported by the laboratory features of factor VIII inhibitor levels and pharmacokinetics, is essential in assessing the success of failure of ITI in these patients.

Research priorities for medically not yet explained symptoms expressed by patients, carers, and healthcare professionals in the Netherlands following the James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership approach.

OBJECTIVE: Experiencing physical symptoms that are medically not yet explained (MNYES) is associated with considerable burden in daily life. Research priorities in this area have been primarily investigator-driven. The present study identifies the top 10 research priorities, incorporating the views of patients, carers and healthcare professionals. METHODS: This study used the Priority Setting Partnership approach in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance (JLA). The priority setting approach combines survey-based data from patients with a specific disorder/condition and relevant stakeholders (i.e., caregivers and healthcare professionals) with input from group meetings and a final priority setting consensus meeting. There were three consecutive phases: (1) online survey with an open-ended question to collect topics for future scientific research (N = 345 participants); (2) an online survey among stakeholders to prioritise the research questions generated in Phase 1 (N = 400); and (3) a final multi-stakeholder consensus meeting, held over two half-days to determine the final top 10 research priorities for the Netherlands (day 1 N = 25, day 2 N = 24). RESULTS: Phase 1 resulted in 572 topics, which were reduced to 37 summary research questions. Phase 2 resulted in 18 research priorities, that were ranked and the top 10 priorities were established during the final consensus meeting. The top 10 research priorities included three main themes: optimising efficient diagnosis and treatment, aetiology and prevention, and coping with MNYES. CONCLUSION: The top 10 priorities provide insight into what is most important for future research into MNYES from the perspective of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.

Assessing the sustainability of the homestay industry for the East Coast of Malaysia using the Delphi approach.

Homestay ecotourism in Malaysia has been extensively examined in terms of its concepts, approaches, activities, and community engagement. However, a comprehensive assessment of the sustainability factors pertaining to host families remains a critical area awaiting exploration. This is paramount for ensuring the long-term viability of homestays and fostering economic benefits within rural communities. The present study seeks to establish direct subjective measurements for evaluating the interplay between local communities, tourism, and resources in safeguarding sustainable homestays. Utilizing the Delphi approach, this research conducted interviews with 51 experts who were actively involved in six homestays located on the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia. The objective was to identify key evaluation indicators pertinent to the homestay industry. The findings underscored the pivotal roles played by community resources and tourism in the sustainability of homestays. Additionally, environmental, economic, and social factors emerged as crucial components for maintaining the industry's sustainability. This innovative assessment methodology offers a valuable instrument for enhancing the sustainability of the homestay sector, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. By embracing this approach, homestay operators can fortify their sustainable management practices and prepare themselves for future pandemics. This study represents a significant contribution to the field of homestay ecotourism, emphasizing the imperative for continued research in this dynamic domain.

Development and pilot testing of the 2019 Canadian Abortion Provider Survey.

BACKGROUND: Substantial changes in abortion care regulations, available medications and national clinical practice guidelines have occurred since a 2012 national Canadian Abortion Provider Survey (CAPS). We developed and piloted the CAPS 2019 survey instrument to explore changes of the abortion provider workforce, their clinical care as well as experiences with stigma and harassment. METHODS: We undertook development and piloting in three phases: (1) development of the preliminary survey sections and questions based on the 2012 survey instrument, (2) content validation and feasibility of including certain content aspects via a modified Delphi Method with panels of clinical and research experts, and (3) pilot testing of the draft survey for face validity and clarity of language; assessing usability of the web-based Research Electronic Data Capture platform including the feasibility of complex skip pattern functionality. We performed content analysis of phase 2 results and used a general inductive approach to identify necessary survey modifications. RESULTS: In phase 1, we generated a survey draft that reflected the changes in Canadian abortion care regulations and guidelines and included questions for clinicians and administrators providing first and second trimester surgical and medical abortion. In phase 2, we held 6 expert panel meetings of 5-8 participants each representing clinicians, administrators and researchers to provide feedback on the initial survey draft. Due to the complexity of certain identified aspects, such as interdisciplinary collaboration and interprovincial care delivery differences, we revised the survey sections through an iterative process of meetings and revisions until we reached consensus on constructs and questions to include versus exclude for not being feasible. In phase 3, we made minor revisions based on pilot testing of the bilingual, web-based survey among additional experts chosen to be widely representative of the study population. Demonstrating its feasibility, we included complex branching and skip pattern logic so each respondent only viewed applicable questions based on their prior responses. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and piloted the CAPS 2019 survey instrument suitable to explore characteristics of a complex multidisciplinary workforce, their care and experience with stigma on a national level, and that can be adapted to other countries.

Assessing and prioritizing biogas barriers to alleviate energy poverty in Pakistan: an integrated AHP and G-TOPSIS model.

Biogas is a promising renewable technology to alleviate energy poverty. Pakistan has a capacity of 5 million bio digesters that can be installed in different farming areas. However, this target has never been achieved because many barriers hamper the biogas industry development. In previous studies, some researchers have indicated these barriers in different geographical contexts: however, these barriers are rarely examined in Pakistan. To fulfill the research gap, this study prioritizes potential barriers. Using a literature review and a modified Delphi technique, we identify 25 sub-barriers and catalog them into 5 main categories. The analytical hierarchy process (AHP) prioritizes the main barriers and sub-barriers based on potential. Grey Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (G-TOPSIS) ranks the practical alternatives to combat these barriers. The study findings specify that the "financial barrier" is the top-ranked barrier among the main categories, followed by technical, socio-cultural, institutional and administrative, and environmental barriers. The overall ranking shows that the "high starting price tag" is ranked first among all sub-barriers in all categories. It has been proposed that "appropriate financial incentives" and "promotion of customized technology" would be feasible alternative solutions to combat the issues. Based on the research findings, some policy recommendations were suggested for biogas uptake in Pakistan. This study may assist policymakers, stakeholders, and government institutions in accelerating the potential of biogas energy to alleviate energy poverty in rural areas of Pakistan.

1st EFORT European Consensus "Medical & Scientific Research Requirements for the Clinical Introduction of Artificial Joint Arthroplasty Devices": Background, Delphi Methodology & Consensus process.

The objectives of the 1st EFORT European Consensus on 'Medical and Scientific Research Requirements for the Clinical Introduction of Artificial Joint Arthroplasty Devices' were foremost to focus on patient safety by establishing performance requirements for medical devices. The 1st EFORT European Consensus applied an a priori-defined, modified Delphi methodology to produce unbiased, high-quality recommendation statements, confirmed by consensus voting of a European expert panel. Intended key outcomes are practical guidelines justified by the current stage of knowledge and based on a broad European Expert Consensus, to maintain innovation and optimisation of orthopaedic devices within the boundaries of MDR 2017/745. Twenty-one main research areas of relevance were defined relying on input from the EFORT IPSI WG1 'Introduction of Innovation' recommendations and a related survey. A modified Delphi approach with a preparatory literature review and work in small groups were used to prepare answers to the research questions in the form of 32 draft Consensus statements. A Consensus Conference in a hybrid format, on-site in the Carl Gustav Carus University of Dresden was organised to further refine the draft statements and define consensus within the complete group of participants by final voting, intended to further quantify expert opinion knowledge. The modified Delphi approach provides practical guidelines for hands-on orientation for orthopaedic surgeons, research institutes and laboratories, orthopaedic device manufacturers, patient representatives, Notified Bodies, National Institutes and authorities. For the first time, initiated by the EFORT IPSI (WG1 'Introduction of Innovation'), knowledge of all related stakeholders was combined in the 1st EFORT European Consensus to develop guidelines and result in a comprehensive set of recommendations.

Establishing a Multidisciplinary Framework for an Emergency Food Supply System Using a Modified Delphi Approach.

A scientific food emergency supply system is helpful for assuring food supplies continuity, improving response efficiency, and reducing disaster losses. However, the framework for a food emergency supply system is currently an understudied area in emergency management post-disaster. In this study, a comprehensive literature review of major databases was performed to identify potential indicators for the emergency food supply system, followed by a two-round modified Delphi with a multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 17) to verify the proposed framework. The effective response rate of questionnaires ranged from 94.4% (17/18) to 100% (17/17) and the authority coefficient of experts was 0.88, indicating high positivity and reliability of the experts. Furthermore, the p-values of Kendall's W were < 0.01 and the Cronbach's α were > 0.7 for all domains and indicators, indicating a high reliability and validity for the proposed framework. Finally, a consensus was reached on all eight domains and 81 indicators. In conclusion, this study introduced and verified a multidisciplinary framework for the food emergency supply system, which could provide a theoretical basis for emergency responders to make corresponding commands and decisions post-disaster.

Health Research Priority Agenda for Ministry of Health, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from 2020 to 2025.

METHOD: The current study applied e-Delphi technique via online self-administered questionnaire was distributing to headquarter, and 16 health affairs directorates spanning 75 hospitals and specialized health centers, 24 primary health-care centers, 2 health-care clusters, and 5 medical cities. In addition, community involvement was represented by 26 organizations: 7 universities, 9 scientific health associations, 5 charitable associations, and 5 key Saudi health partner organizations. Research field's prioritization was performed by ranking weighed mean aggregate score via application of the combined consensus and metrics-based approach. Then the top five research topics were analyzed, verified, refined and classified into specific health research themes. RESULTS: The study included 2252 participants and attained a 90% response rate. The study deliverables were listed into two research priority domains: health system research priorities (1st agenda) and diseases and health problems priorities (2nd agenda). Overall, the types of the top five research priorities in the first agenda included service delivery (40.9%), health workforce (14.4%), governance and leadership (13.0%) ,preparedness and response to disasters and emergency (10.2%), health information systems (9.3%), access to essential medicines products and vaccines (6.97%), and financing (5.1%). On the other hand, the top five research priority areas in the second agenda were non-communicable diseases (16.9%), child and neonatal health (15.9%), medications (13.6%), women health (10.4%), dental health (10.4%). furthermore, biomedical and radiology technology and devices (5.6%), communicable diseases (3.7%), nutrition (3.2%), trauma and general management (3.2%), innovative approaches (2.4%), emergency management (2.7%), physical therapy and rehabilitation (2.3%), public health (2.3%), holistic approaches to health and wellness, behavior and lifestyle (1.5%), environmental health (0.6%),pilgrims' health (0.6%), geriatric health (0.3%), and family medicine (0.3%). CONCLUSION: Adequate description of the stakeholders and methodology can strengthen legitimacy and credibility and maximize the impact of the priority-setting process. Involvement of policymakers, researchers and funding organizations increases the opportunity of translation into actual research, supports redesigning the research landscape and ensures uptake of results and integration.

From international guidelines to real-world practice consensus on investigations and management of status epilepticus in adults: A modified Delphi approach.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a consensus which is practical and ready-to-use on investigations (ISE) and for management of status epilepticus (MSE) in adults using a modified Delphi approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 4-round modified Delphi approach was used. First and second rounds were conducted using Google® survey with structured statements and 6-point Likert scale response. Threshold agreement was set to ≥80%. Third round was a face-to-face meeting aimed to facilitate the development of approach algorithms for ISE and MSE. Fourth round was a final review asking participants to rate the algorithms post completion. RESULTS: The panel consisted of 8 board-certified epileptologists along with 6 neurologists from main regional hospitals across Thailand. Thirty-seven statements for ISE and 68 statements for MSE were used for the Round I survey, 17/37 (45.9%) and 49/68 (72.1%) reached threshold agreement (≥80%). The average absolute-agreement intraclass correlation coefficients for ISE and MSE were 0.82 (95% CI 0.71, 0.89) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.73, 0.87), respectively; indicating good extent of consensus among participants. Upon Round II, further 10/18 (55.6%) for ISE and 10/19 (52.6%) for MSE reached agreement. In Round III, face-to-face point-by-point discussion was performed to generate approach algorithms. All (100%) provided positive responses with the algorithms post completion in Round IV. CONCLUSION: A practical and ready-to-use consensus using modified Delphi approach on ISE and MSE was developed in a Thai regional hospital context. In real practice, this approach is more suitable and feasible for a localized setting when compared with totally adopting international guidelines.

Building Consensus on an Integrated Care Pathway in Geriatric Rehabilitation: A Modified Delphi Study Among Professional Experts.

To improve continuity and coordination of care in geriatric rehabilitation, an integrated care pathway was developed in the south of the Netherlands. This study aims to reach nationwide consensus on the content and structure of this locally developed pathway using a two-round Delphi study with specialized elderly care physicians (n = 37) as experts. In the first round, experts indicated their level of agreement on 65 statements representing the pathway on a 5-point Likert-type scale. Statements that did not gain consensus (interquartile range > 1) were redistributed to participants in Round 2. Consensus was reached on 56 statements (86%) after Round 1 and on 60 statements (92%) after Round 2. In total, 53 statements were assessed as relevant, seven statements were considered irrelevant, and five statements did not reach consensus. We conclude that there is broad nationwide consensus on the pathway, which therefore has the potential to be disseminated and implemented on a wider scale.