2017
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2017-312901
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

NETS1HDstudy: development of a Hirschsprung’s disease core outcome set

Abstract: ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to develop a Hirschsprung’s disease (HD) core outcome set (COS).MethodsCandidate outcomes were identified from a systematic review and stakeholder nomination. A three-phase Delphi process and consensus meeting were used to prioritise candidate outcomes based on scores assigned by stakeholder participants using a nine-point scale. In phases two and three, participants were shown graphical representations of their panel’s scores and all panels’ scores respectively for eac… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
51
1
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(54 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
1
51
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the final version of the CGA Delphi, we included statements that ≥ 69% of participants from both panels scored as 7-9 and < 15% scored as 1-3. 119 We excluded the following criteria from the final version of the CGA Delphi: mild or moderate frailty, having more than one long-term condition, social isolation or care home residents as criteria to target the delivery of the CGA, hospital length of stay as an Non-medical areas nominated in round 1 (and scored in round 2) that might be included in the assessment…”
Section: Results From Roundmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the final version of the CGA Delphi, we included statements that ≥ 69% of participants from both panels scored as 7-9 and < 15% scored as 1-3. 119 We excluded the following criteria from the final version of the CGA Delphi: mild or moderate frailty, having more than one long-term condition, social isolation or care home residents as criteria to target the delivery of the CGA, hospital length of stay as an Non-medical areas nominated in round 1 (and scored in round 2) that might be included in the assessment…”
Section: Results From Roundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We planned to use a cut-off point of ≥ 70% participants scoring 7-9 (really important) and < 15% scoring 1-3 (not important) to determine the statements to include in the final version of the Delphi. 119,120 We reduced this to ≥ 69% because of a large number of statements receiving a score of very important from 69% of participants; it is not unusual for this type of post hoc pragmatic decision to be taken in Delphi exercises. 120…”
Section: Changes From the Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the COMiT’ID study, personalised email invitations were the most effective method in terms of numbers of consented participants. This is also a common approach used in other studies which have high response rate [ 7 12 ; 14 ; 15 ]. This indicates that to be successful, COS developers need to access experts through the appropriate infrastructure including professional networks and patient organisations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Retention rates throughout the iterative e-Delphi process to the final round have not been reported consistently in the literature [ 4 ] but, for those that do, the numbers of participants recruited and retained remain highly variable from study to study. For example, the size of several recent international e-Delphi surveys recruiting multi-stakeholder groups that include healthcare users (members of the public) can range from 39 to 838 participants completing the final round, with retention rates of 19.5 to 87.1% [ 7 15 ]. Small group size and high attrition rates can impact on the final results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation