A Delphi survey to determine how educational interventions for evidence-based practice should be reported: Stage 2 of the development of a reporting guideline

BMC Medical Education

Marie T Williams⁶  Julie K Tilson²  David Moher⁸  Marilyn Hammick⁴  Paul Glasziou³  James Galipeau¹  Maureen P McEvoy⁹  Lucy K Lewis⁵  Anna C Phillips⁷ 

[1] Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Centre for Practice-Changing Research (CPRC), The Ottawa Hospital, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada;University of Southern California, Division of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, 1540 Alcazar St, CHP155, Los Angeles 90089, USA;Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice (CREBP), Bond University, University Drive, Robina, Queensland 4226, Australia;Bournemouth University, Royal London House, Christchurch Road, Bournemouth, Dorset, UK;Health and Use of Time Group (HUT), Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide 5001, Australia;School of Population Health, Nutritional Physiology Research Centre (NPRC), University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide 5001, Australia;School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, GPO box 2471, Adelaide 5001, Australia;Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Centre for Practice-Changing Research (CPCR), The Ottawa Hospital, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada;International Centre for Allied Health Evidence (iCAHE), School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, GPO box 2471, Adelaide 5001, Australia

关键词: Delphi survey;    Reporting guideline;    Evidence-based practice;   

Others  :  1092135
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-14-159

 received in 2014-02-13, accepted in 2014-06-26,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Undertaking a Delphi exercise is recommended during the second stage in the development process for a reporting guideline. To continue the development for the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) a Delphi survey was undertaken to determine the consensus opinion of researchers, journal editors and educators in evidence-based practice (EBP) regarding the information items that should be reported when describing an educational intervention for EBP.

Methods

A four round online Delphi survey was conducted from October 2012 to March 2013. The Delphi panel comprised international researchers, educators and journal editors in EBP. Commencing with an open-ended question, participants were invited to volunteer information considered important when reporting educational interventions for EBP. Over three subsequent rounds participants were invited to rate the importance of each of the Delphi items using an 11 point Likert rating scale (low 0 to 4, moderate 5 to 6, high 7 to 8 and very high >8). Consensus agreement was set a priori as at least 80 per cent participant agreement. Consensus agreement was initially calculated within the four categories of importance (low to very high), prior to these four categories being merged into two (<7 and ≥7). Descriptive statistics for each item were computed including the mean Likert scores, standard deviation (SD), range and median participant scores. Mean absolute deviation from the median (MAD-M) was also calculated as a measure of participant disagreement.

Results

Thirty-six experts agreed to participate and 27 (79%) participants completed all four rounds. A total of 76 information items were generated across the four survey rounds. Thirty-nine items (51%) were specific to describing the intervention (as opposed to other elements of study design) and consensus agreement was achieved for two of these items (5%). When the four rating categories were merged into two (<7 and ≥7), 18 intervention items achieved consensus agreement.

Conclusion

This Delphi survey has identified 39 items for describing an educational intervention for EBP. These Delphi intervention items will provide the groundwork for the subsequent consensus discussion to determine the final inclusion of items in the GREET, the first reporting guideline for educational interventions in EBP.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Phillips et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Leung GM: Evidence-based practice revisited. Asia Pac J Public Health 2001, 13(2):116-121.
• [2]Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group: Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 1992, 268(17):2420-2425.
• [3]Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996, 312(7023):71-72.
• [4]Dawes M, Summerskill W, Glasziou P, Cartabellotta A, Martin J, Hopayian K, Porzsolt F, Burls A, Osborne J, Second International Conference of Evidence-Based Health Care Teachers and Developers: Sicily statement on evidence-based practice. BMC Med Educ 2005, 5(1):1.
• [5]Morrison JM, Sullivan F, Murray E, Jolly B: Evidence-based education: development of an instrument to critically appraise reports of educational interventions. Med Educ 1999, 33(12):890-893.
• [6]Wong SC, McEvoy MP, Wiles LK, Lewis LK: Magnitude of change in outcomes following entry-level evidence-based practice training: a systematic review. Int J Med Educ 2013, 4:107-114.
• [7]Young T, Rohwer A, Volmink J, Clarke M: What are the Effects of Teaching Evidence-Based Health Care (EBHC)? Overview of systematic reviews. PLoS ONE 2014, 9(1):e86706.
• [8]Ilic D, Maloney S: Methods of teaching medical trainees evidence-based medicine: a systematic review. Med Educ 2014, 48(2):124-135.
• [9]Olson CA, Bakken LL: Evaluations of educational interventions: getting them published and increasing their impact. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2013, 33(2):77-80.
• [10]Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Chen HC, ten Cate O, O'Brien B: Evidence-based medicine training in undergraduate medical education: a review and critique of the literature published 2006–2011. Acad Med 2013, 88(7):1022-1028.
• [11]Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Weeks L, Peters J, Kober T, Dias S, Schulz KF, Plint AC, Moher D: Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Sysematic Reviews 2012, 11:MR000030.
• [12]The EQUATOR network [http://www.equator-network.org/ webcite]
• [13]Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group: CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med 2010, 8:18.
• [14]von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, STROBE Initiative: The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Epidemiology 2007, 18(6):800-804.
• [15]Des Jarlais DC, Lyles C, Crepaz N, TREND Group: Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. Am J Public Health 2004, 94(3):361-366.
• [16]Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, Altman DG, Barbour V, Macdonald H, Johnston M, Lamb SE, Dixon-Woods M, McCulloch P, Wyatt JC, Chan A, Michie S: Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ 2014, 348:g1687.
• [17]Haidet P, Levine RE, Parmelee DX, Crow S, Kennedy F, Kelly PA, Perkowski L, Michaelsen L, Richards BF: Perspective: guidelines for reporting team-based learning activities in the medical and health sciences education literature. Acad Med 2012, 87(3):292-299.
• [18]Stiles CR, Biondo PD, Cummings G, Hagen NA: Clinical trials focusing on cancer pain educational interventions: core components to include during planning and reporting. J Pain Symptom Manage 2010, 40(2):301-308.
• [19]Patricio M, Juliao M, Fareleira F, Young M, Norman G, Vaz Carneiro A: A comprehensive checklist for reporting the use of OSCEs. Med Teach 2009, 31(2):112-124.
• [20]Howley L, Szauter K, Perkowski L, Clifton M, McNaughton N, Association of Standardized Patient Educators (ASPE): Quality of standardised patient research reports in the medical education literature: review and recommendations. Med Educ 2008, 42(4):350-358.
• [21]Phillips AC, Lewis LK, McEvoy MP, Galipeau J, Glasziou P, Hammick M, Moher D, Tilson J, Williams MT: Protocol for development of the guideline for reporting evidence based practice educational interventions and teaching (GREET) statement. BMC Med Educ 2013, 13:9.
• [22]Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG: Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med 2010, 7(2):e1000217.
• [23]Hugenholtz NIR, Schaafsma FG, Nieuwenhuijsen K, van Dijk FJH: Effect of an EBM course in combination with case method learning sessions: an RCT on professional performance, job satisfaction, and self-efficacy of occupational physicians. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2008, 82(1):107-115.
• [24]Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H: Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 2000, 32(4):1008-1015.
• [25]Sinha IP, Smyth RL, Williamson PR: Using the Delphi technique to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials: recommendations for the future based on a systematic review of existing studies. PLoS Med 2011, 8(1):e1000393.
• [26]Phillips AC, Lewis LK, McEvoy MP, Galipeau J, Glasziou P, Hammick M, Moher D, Tilson JK, Williams MT: A systematic review of how studies describe educational interventions for evidence-based practice: stage 1 of the development of a reporting guideline. BMC Med Educ 2014, 14(1):152. Epub ahead of print
• [27]Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar M, Burnand B, LaCalle J, Lazaro P, Loo M, McDonnell J, Vader J, Kahan J: RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). Santa Monica: RAND Corporation; 2001.
• [28]Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna HP: A critical review of the Delphi technique as a research methodology for nursing. Int J Nurs Stud 2001, 38(2):195-200.
• [29]Moher D, Weeks L, Ocampo M, Seely D, Sampson M, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Miller D, Simera I, Grimshaw J, Hoey J: Describing reporting guidelines for health research: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64(7):718-742.
• [30]French P, Ho Y, Lee L: A Delphi survey of evidence-based nursing priorities in Hong Kong. J Nurs Manag 2002, 10(5):265-273.
• [31]Sánchez-Mendiola M: Evidence-based medicine teaching in the Mexican Army Medical School. Med Teach 2004, 26(7):661-663.
• [32]The RAND Corporation [http://www.rand.org/ webcite]
• [33]Banks DE, Shi R, McLarty J, Cowl CT, Smith D, Tarlo SM, Daroowalla F, Balmes J, Baumann M: American College of Chest Physicians consensus statement on the respiratory health effects of asbestos. Results of a Delphi study. Chest 2009, 135(6):1619-1627.