Abstract
Data collection and review are the building blocks of academic research regardless of the discipline. The gathered and reviewed data, however, need to be validated in order to obtain accurate information. The Delphi consensus is known as a method for validating the data. However, several studies have shown that this method is time-consuming and requires a number of rounds to complete. Until now, there has been no clear evidence that validating data by a Delphi consensus is more significant than by a general consensus. In this regard, if data validation between both methods are not significantly different, then just using a general consensus method is sufficient, easier, and less time-consuming. Hence, this study aims to find out whether or not data validation by a Delphi consensus method is more significant than by a general consensus method. This study firstly collected and reviewed the data of sustainable building criteria, secondly validated these data by applying each consensus method, and finally made a comparison between both consensus methods. The results showed that seventeen of the valid criteria obtained from the general consensus and reduced by the Delphi consensus were found to be inconsistent for sustainable building assessments in Cambodia. Therefore, this study concludes that using the Delphi consensus method is more significant in validating the gathered and reviewed data. This experiment contributes to the selection and application of consensus methods in validating data, information, or criteria, especially in engineering fields.
Highlights
Data collection and review are considered important in gathering, reporting, and summarizing the existing literature in the field [1], while conducting experimental research based on existing literature is recognized as a building block of all academic research activities regardless of discipline [2,3]
The gathered data of reviewed sustainable building criteria were first validated by using the general consensus method
The results showed that seventeen of the valid sustainable building criteria obtained from the general consensus method and reduced by the Delphi consensus method were found to be inconsistent for sustainable building assessments in Cambodia
Summary
Data collection and review are considered important in gathering, reporting, and summarizing the existing literature in the field [1], while conducting experimental research based on existing literature is recognized as a building block of all academic research activities regardless of discipline [2,3]. The collected or reviewed data sometimes need to be validated in order to obtain accurate information, especially in engineering fields [4,5]. Delphi consensus has been used to obtain accurate information and handle complex problems that require a judgmental analysis [6,7,8,9]. Norman and Olaf [11] conducted an experiment of the Delphi method to obtain the most reliable opinion consensus of a group, but with controlled opinion feedback. The Delphi methods were found to be useful in obtaining accurate information that is unavailable, in handling complex problems that require more judgmental analysis, and in defining areas where there is considerable uncertainty and/or a lack of agreed knowledge or disagreement [15,16]. Several studies have shown that the Delphi consensus method is a useful approach for the management of chronic pain during and after COVID-19 [17], for the development and validation of a graded motor imagery intervention for phantom limb pain in patients [18], for the design and validation of the scale to measure aquatic competence in children by evaluating aquatic competence in children from three to six years old [19], and for the development of an environmental health sciences COVID-19 research agenda [20]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
