Brotherhood marketing in Andalucia: prospective analysis through the Delphi method

Consensus group methods, such as the Delphi method and nominal group technique (NGT), are used to synthesize expert opinions when evidence is lacking. Despite their extensive use, these methods are inconsistently applied. Their use in medical education research has not been well studied. The authors set out to describe the use of consensus methods in medical education research and to assess the reporting quality of these methods and results. Using scoping review methods, the authors searched the Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, PubMed, Scopus, and ERIC databases for 2009-2016. Full-text articles that focused on medical education and the keywords Delphi, RAND, NGT, or other consensus group methods were included. A standardized extraction form was used to collect article demographic data and features reflecting methodological rigor. Of the articles reviewed, 257 met the inclusion criteria. The Modified Delphi (105/257; 40.8%), Delphi (91/257; 35.4%), and NGT (23/257; 8.9%) methods were most often used. The most common study purpose was curriculum development or reform (68/257; 26.5%), assessment tool development (55/257; 21.4%), and defining competencies (43/257; 16.7%). The reporting quality varied, with 70.0% (180/257) of articles reporting a literature review, 27.2% (70/257) reporting what background information was provided to participants, 66.1% (170/257) describing the number of participants, 40.1% (103/257) reporting if private decisions were collected, 37.7% (97/257) reporting if formal feedback of group ratings was shared, and 43.2% (111/257) defining consensus a priori. Consensus methods are poorly standardized and inconsistently used in medical education research. Improved criteria for reporting are needed.

Prueba máximo caracteres resumen autor

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.

Water quality in the Dawu water source area is primarily studied through the traditional water quality assessment method that measures the chemical parameters of water against the existing standards, which is simple but cannot accurately describe the water quality. Although the water quality index (WQI) proposed by Horton is widely used for comprehensive water quality evaluation, parameter selection and weight determination are primarily based on the Delphi method, which is subjective and random. Moreover, in groundwater evaluation, the focus is primarily laid on general chemical parameters, such as Total Dissolved Solids, hydrogen ion concentration, Electrical Conductivity, and heavy metals, such as Hydrargyrum, Arsenic, and Chromium, with limited consideration for organic pollutants. In this study, WQI technology in combination with the entropy weight method was used to evaluate the groundwater environmental quality of the Dawu water source area, and the scientific results were analyzed by comparing the full index, Delphi, and multivariate statistical analysis methods. The results showed that the groundwater in the Dawu water source area generally had good quality and was potable and that the application of multivariate statistical analysis method was more suitable than the Delphi method in the index selection process.

The Delphi technique is a consensus method aiming to obtain statistical estimations from a qualitative approach, through an iterative process that leads to consensus within experts. The main characteristics of the technique include iteration, anonymity, feedback, and consensus reaching. When high-quality, quantitative evidence on a particular topic is insufficient, the Delphi technique can be used for making decisions in clinical scenarios. However, the quality of studies on breast cancer conducted with this technique, has not been assessed. We aim to evaluate the quality of studies on breast cancer which used the Delphi technique as their method. A quality assessment tool (Quali-D) was created through consensus among experts on the Delphi technique. Then, the tool was applied to studies on breast cancer which used the Delphi technique as their method. Studies conducted through the Delphi technique mainly assessed for quality indicators and expressed needs in patients with breast cancer. High-quality characteristics were reported in 63.89% of the studies. 98.61% used the Delphi technique due to lack of a more adequate method to solve their research question. 98.61% summarized and presented results in a clear way. In 91.67% of the studies, at least two rounds were conducted. 86.11% described the methods for expert selection in a complete manner. Only 54.17% of the studies reported an anonymous process and 4.17% of the studies disclosed conflicts of interest thoroughly. A variety of topics were assessed through the Delphi technique in cases where no other technique would have been more appropriate for assessing these issues. Significant limitations are present in terms of anonymity and full disclosure of conflicts of interest. We found that the quality of studies conducted with the Delphi technique regarding breast cancer is overall good. However, the limitations of each study must be considered when applying their results to clinical practice.

This study aims to determine the factors that cause burnout in nurses, who are critical stakeholders in health service delivery, and to prioritize these factors. For this purpose, Delphi and SWARA methods were used. The research was conducted in a private hospital serving Black Sea Region Türkiye. 10-unit manager nurses who are experts in their fields participated in the Delphi method. As a result of the three-stage Delphi implementation, 16 burnout causes were determined. The 16 identified causes were prioritized with the SWARA method. 47 nurses participated in the SWARA method. As a result of the research, it was determined that the most critical reason for burnout was not being able to get money for the work done/low salary. It was concluded that obscure patient relatives were the least important cause of burnout. It is thought that the financial and moral reward of nurses who work hard will be beneficial. It may be suggested to make satisfactory remuneration for the labor and service provided or to support and increase the raw wage with various contributions. It can be suggested to raise awareness among nurses about burnout and coping.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to describe an application of Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) technique for the selection of waste treatment and disposal technology for municipal solid waste (MSW).Design/methodology/approach– The proposed approach is based on the integration of Delphi and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) techniques. A model has been proposed to evaluate the best treatment and disposal technology. Expert opinions have been incorporated in the selection of criteria. AHP has been used to determine the weights of criteria, followed by ranking of the available technologies.Findings– Delphi method was used to derive appropriate evaluation criteria to assess the potential alternative technologies. A set of identified holistic criteria was used, representing the environmental, social, and economic aspects, as compared to the sub-criteria concept generally found in existing literature. Quantitative weightings from the AHP model were calculated to identify the priorities of alternatives. The study provides a simple framework for technology selection as compared to the complex models present in the literature, reducing the uncertainty, cost and time consumed in the decision-making process.Practical implications– The model identifies the optimal technologies for the handling, treatment and disposal of MSW in a better economic and more environmentally sustainable way. The study provides a simple framework for selection as compared to the complex models present in the literature, reducing the uncertainty, cost and time taken by the decision-making process.Originality/value– The paper highlights a new insight into MCDM techniques to select an optimum treatment and disposal technology suitable for MSW management in India. The study identifies a minimal relevant set of evaluation criteria, and appropriate technologies for the handling, treatment, and disposal of MSW in a more economic and environmentally sustainable way.

The Delphi method has been used as a main research method by a growing number of researchers in the Construction Engineering and Management (CEM) field in the past two decades. Although a number of studies are available on the use of Delphi, few researchers fully examine the potential of the Delphi method in the combined use of statistical techniques, which is an inevitable trend for future Delphi research. This paper aims to review the combined use of Delphi and other quantitative methods in the CEM field based on a structured literature review of 88 relevant papers. All of the 88 papers are systematically identified from ten well-known peer-reviewed CEM journals published in the period of 1990–2012. Topic coverage, application requirements, and statistical techniques in the 88 Delphi papers are reviewed. The mix use of the Delphi method with three advanced modelling methods, such as Fuzzy sets, Analytical Hierarchy Process, and Analytical Network Process is also examined. These review results provide practical references for researchers having interests in applying Delphi method in CEM research.

Bedside incision and drainage (I&D) of skin abscesses is a common medical procedure performed in a variety of medical settings. Yet, there is a paucity of published validated educational tools to teach and assess competency for this procedure. To validate an educational tool to teach and assess competency for bedside I&D of skin abscesses via the Delphi consensus and Angoff standard setting methods. Expert consensus on the importance of each procedural step in the educational tool was obtained using the Delphi method, consisting of four rounds of iterative revisions based on input from a panel of experts. The passing cut-off score for a proficient provider was determined using the modified dichotomous Angoff method. All participants met the minimum criteria of active involvement in resident education and performance of at least 20 skin abscess I&D's within the past 5years. Participant specialties included general surgery, emergency medicine, and internal medicine. The primary outcome was consensus on procedural steps and errors, defined as an interquartile range ≤ 2 on a 9-point Likert scale. A cut-off score was determined by the average across all respondents for the anticipated number of errors that would be committed by a provider with the level of proficiency defined in the survey. Qualitative input was incorporated into the educational tool. At the end of four rounds of review via the Delphi process, participants achieved consensus on 93% of items on the clinical checklist and 85% of errors on the assessment checklist. Via the modified dichotomous Angoff method, the determined passing cut-off for competency was 6 out of 22 errors. An educational and evaluation tool for bedside I&D of skin abscesses was validated via the Delphi and Angoff methods.

Our research objective is to establish a fuzzy evaluation mechanism for rural village officials in China using the theory of triangular multiplication preference relationships. Our survey targets villagers in rural areas of China where village autonomy is implemented. The research methods include a questionnaire survey, Delphi, and fuzzy evaluation methods. After research analysis and comparison of results, it is shown that for the evaluation index system of village officials constructed using the Delphi method, practical evaluation of village officials can be achieved through fuzzy comprehensive evaluation based on triangular multiplication preference relationships. Using the Delphi technique, this article first created a village official assessment index system. It then performed validity tests based on the Kaiser‐Meyer‐Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett index system, as well as reliability testing using the Cronbach coefficient. Then, the preference relationship of triangular multiplication and the root product square method were used to determine the weight of the questionnaire indicators, and consistency was judged. Then, based on the membership function, the fuzzy boundaries of various indicators are displayed to construct a fuzzy evaluation matrix. Finally, the evaluation matrix is subjected to the Zadeh operation to obtain a fuzzy, comprehensive evaluation result of the work performance of village officials. Our main contribution is establishing an evaluation index system for village officials through the Delphi method and achieving a practical evaluation of village officials using triangular multiplication preference relationships and fuzzy evaluation theory.

A comparison of three methods to identify chemicals hazards in French research laboratories

The initial use of the Delphi technique was forecasting in order to be able to plan ahead.
 
 Opsomming
 Die aanvanklike toepassing van die Delphi-tegniek was voorspelling met die doel om vooruit te kan beplan.
 
 *Please note: This is a reduced version of the abstract. Please refer to PDF for full text.

Objective: The growing importance of evidence based practice in athletic training is necessitating academics and clinicians to be able to make judgments about the quality or lack of the body of research evidence and peer-reviewed standards pertaining to clinical questions. To assist in the judgment process, consensus methods, namely brainstorming, nominal group technique and the Delphi method can be used. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature related to the Delphi Method and its potential implications for evidence-based practice and peer-reviewed standards in athletic training. Data Sources: We searched PubMed and MEDLINE (1978–2007), CINAHL (1993–2006), Dissertation Abstracts (1979–2006) and Google Scholar (1983–2007) using the terms “Delphi method,” “modified Delphi technique,” “consensus methods,” “Delphi technique,” and combined search terms of “Delphi method AND allied health, AND medicine AND dentistry, AND nursing. Data Synthesis: Textual support for the use of the Delphi Method in athletic training and a brief review of the literature pertaining to the: objectives; advantages; limitations commonly associated with the use of the Delphi Method; and research protocol. Conclusions/Recommendations: The Delphi Method in athletic training has been used to fulfill two objectives; the need for evidence based practice and the need to establish policies and procedures when none are in existence or it is difficult for one individual to make a decision. The Delphi Method and other consensus development methods should not be viewed as a scientific method for creating new knowledge, but rather as processes for making the best use of available information, be that scientific data or the collective wisdom of participants.

The Delphi method is a structured data-collection process aimed at facilitating experts to achieve a certain level of agreement on a complex problem. In several subsequent rounds experts give their opinion on the problem of interest, usually by means of a standardized questionnaire. After each round experts receive controlled opinion feedback in the form of a summary of the findings. Based on this feedback experts are allowed to reconsider their opinion in the next round. Although the Delphi method seems to provide opportunities for developing rankings, research into its application to the development of rankings seems to be non-existent. Furthermore, the Delphi method has several unresolved methodological issues, in particular regarding the measurement of agreement and the provision of controlled opinion feedback. Therefore, the general objective of this PhD project was to find out what the methodological challenges and opportunities are of the Delphi method for developing rankings. To achieve this objective, four studies were conducted. In the first study, simulations were performed to find out how various agreement indices behave within and across the rounds of a Delphi study. In the second study, the Delphi method was applied to develop a ranking of research domains in landscape architecture. An experiment within the study investigated the effect of two types of controlled opinion feedback on the drop-out rate, experts’ degree of opinion change, and the level of agreement among experts. The third study investigated the methodological characteristics of six urban sustainability rankings, which resulted in a recommendation to define and operationalize the concept ‘urban sustainability’ using the Delphi method. Therefore, in the fourth and final study the Delphi method was applied to find out which components experts find most relevant for defining and measuring urban sustainability. An experiment within this study provided insight into the effect of feeding back experts’ initial ratings on the degree of opinion change and the level of agreement. Overall, this PhD project showed how the Delphi method may be used to: (1) obtain a ranking of objects on a ranking attribute and (2) obtain a definition and operationalization of a complex ranking attribute. It was also shown that these applications of the Delphi method do not come without challenges. First, selection criteria and search strategies need to be developed by which sufficient numbers of different types of experts may be found. Second, for the first Delphi questionnaire a parsimonious list of items (e.g. ranking objects or components of a ranking attribute) needs to be drawn up that largely covers the potentially great diversity of existing items. Third, careful considerations need to be made about which types of information (i.e. summary statistics, rationales, experts’ own initial ratings) to feed back to experts after every round as this may influence various Delphi outcome measures. Fourth, the choice for a particular consensus, agreement, or association index needs to be carefully made and justified as it determines the level of agreement among experts that is obtained. Finally, this project showed that by means of a simulation study and two real-world Delphi experiments new knowledge about the functioning of the Delphi method could be acquired. More of these studies are needed to establish evidence-based guidelines and to uncover the full potential of the Delphi method for developing rankings.

The Delphi method is a combination of qualitative and quantitative forecasting evaluation method. It draws the results from the experts by several rounds of anonymous consultations. Combining with the real case of constructing integrated medicine curriculum evaluation index system the author introduces the concept of the Delphi method, its implementation steps, the statistical analysis and the application, the focus on principle of the Delphi method and to implementation technology and to optimize the application of the Delphi method in medical education research. Key words: The Delphi method; Integrated medicine curriculum; Evaluation index system