Abstract
Background: The Delphi method is used in a wide variety of settings as a method of building consensus on
important issues. Traditionally, the Delphi method uses multiple rounds of a survey to allow for feedback of other
participants’ survey responses in between rounds. By informing participants about how others answer a question or
prioritise specific topics, it allows for diverse opinions to inform the consensus process. For this reason, the Delphi
method is popular as a consensus building approach in developing core outcome sets (COS), i.e. the minimum
agreed set of standardised outcomes that should be measured and reported in studies on a specific health
condition. In a COS setting, participants prioritise the importance of outcomes for inclusion in a COS. This usually
involves participating in multiple rounds of a survey that can span several weeks or months. Challenges with
participant retention have been highlighted in previous COS. We will compare a three-round with a Real-Time
Delphi approach on prioritised outcomes. This trial is embedded within the COHESION study which is developing a
COS for interventions treating neonatal encephalopathy.
Methods: One hundred and eighty stakeholders (parents/caregivers of infants diagnosed and treated with neonatal
encephalopathy, healthcare providers and researchers) will be randomised using stratified randomisation to take
part in either the Multi-Round or Real-Time Delphi. Stakeholders will rate the importance of the same set of
outcomes in both arms. We will compare the prioritised outcomes at the end of both surveys as well as other
parameters such as feedback, initial condition and iteration effects.
Discussion: This trial will provide evidence to inform decisions on the use of Multi-Round compared to Real-Time
Delphi survey methods.
Trial registration: NCT04471103. Registered on 14 July 2020.
important issues. Traditionally, the Delphi method uses multiple rounds of a survey to allow for feedback of other
participants’ survey responses in between rounds. By informing participants about how others answer a question or
prioritise specific topics, it allows for diverse opinions to inform the consensus process. For this reason, the Delphi
method is popular as a consensus building approach in developing core outcome sets (COS), i.e. the minimum
agreed set of standardised outcomes that should be measured and reported in studies on a specific health
condition. In a COS setting, participants prioritise the importance of outcomes for inclusion in a COS. This usually
involves participating in multiple rounds of a survey that can span several weeks or months. Challenges with
participant retention have been highlighted in previous COS. We will compare a three-round with a Real-Time
Delphi approach on prioritised outcomes. This trial is embedded within the COHESION study which is developing a
COS for interventions treating neonatal encephalopathy.
Methods: One hundred and eighty stakeholders (parents/caregivers of infants diagnosed and treated with neonatal
encephalopathy, healthcare providers and researchers) will be randomised using stratified randomisation to take
part in either the Multi-Round or Real-Time Delphi. Stakeholders will rate the importance of the same set of
outcomes in both arms. We will compare the prioritised outcomes at the end of both surveys as well as other
parameters such as feedback, initial condition and iteration effects.
Discussion: This trial will provide evidence to inform decisions on the use of Multi-Round compared to Real-Time
Delphi survey methods.
Trial registration: NCT04471103. Registered on 14 July 2020.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Trials |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue number | 142 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 15 Feb 2021 |
Keywords
- Real-Time Delphi
- Randomised trial
- Multi-Round Delphi
- Methodology
- Core outcome sets