Delphi method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:41, 5 November 2023

Revision as of 07:59, 3 December 2023

Line 4:

Delphi can also be used to help reach expert consensus and develop professional guidelines.<ref name="Taylor2020"/> It is used for such purposes in many health-related fields, including clinical medicine, public health, and research.<ref name="Taylor2020"/><ref name=Moher2010/>

Delphi is based on the principle that forecasts (or decisions) from a structured group of individuals are more accurate than those from unstructured groups.<ref name="rw2001">{{cite book | vauthors = Rowe G, Wright G | author-link2 = George Wright (psychologist) | date = 2001 | chapter = Expert Opinions in Forecasting.: The Role of the Delphi Technique. | veditors = Armstrong | title = Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook of Researchers and Practitioners | series = International Series in Operations Research & Management Science | volume = 30 | pages = 125–144 | ___location = Boston | publisher = Kluwer Academic Publishers | doi = 10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_7 | isbn = 978-0-7923-7401-5 | chapter-url = https://www3.nd.edu/~busiforc/handouts/Other%20Articles/expertopinions.pdf }}</ref> The experts answer questionnaires in two or more rounds. After each round, a [[facilitator]] or change agent<ref>{{Cite journal | vauthors = McLaughlin MW |date=1990 |title=The Rand Change Agent Study Revisited: Macro Perspectives and Micro Realities |jstor =1176973 |journal=Educational Researcher |volume=19 |issue=9 |pages=11–16 |doi=10.2307/1176973 |issn=0013-189X}}</ref> provides an anonymised summary of the experts' forecasts from the previous round as well as the reasons they provided for their judgments. Thus, experts are encouraged to revise their earlier answers in light of the replies of other members of their panel. It is believed that during this process the range of the answers will decrease and the group will converge towards the "correct" answer. Finally, the process is stopped after a predefined stopping criterion (e.g., number of rounds, achievement of consensus, stability of results), and the [[mean]] or [[median]] scores of the final rounds determine the results.<ref name="rw1999">{{cite journal | vauthors = Rowe G, Wright G | title = The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis. | journal = International Journal of Forecasting | date = October 1999 | volume = 15 | issue = 4 | pages = 353–375 | doi = 10.1016/S0169-2070(99)00018-7 | s2cid = 10745965 }}</ref>

Special attention has to be paid to the formulation of the Delphi theses and the definition and selection of the experts in order to avoid methodological weaknesses that severely threaten the validity and reliability of the results.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Markmann C, Spickermann A, von der Gracht HA, Brem A | title = Improving the question formulation in Delphi‐like surveys: Analysis of the effects of abstract language and amount of information on response behavior. | journal = Futures & Foresight Science | date = March 2021 | volume = 3 | issue = 1 | pages = e56 | doi = 10.1002/ffo2.56 | s2cid = 225273393 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Mauksch S, Heiko A, Gordon TJ | title = Who is an expert for foresight? A review of identification methods. | journal = Technological Forecasting and Social Change | date = May 2020 | volume = 154 | pages = 119982 | doi = 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119982 | s2cid = 216161197 }} </ref>

Line 73:

==== Use in reporting guidelines====

Use of the Delphi method in the development of guidelines for the reporting of health research<ref name=Moher2010>{{cite journal | vauthors = Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG | title = Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines | journal = PLOS Medicine | volume = 7 | issue = 2 | pages = e1000217 | date = February 2010 | pmid = 20169112 | pmc = 2821895 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217 | doi-access = free }}</ref> is recommended, especially for experienced developers.<ref name="EQUATOR">{{cite web |title=Developing your reporting guideline |url=https://www.equator-network.org/toolkits/developing-a-reporting-guideline/developing-your-reporting-guideline/ |website=www.equator-network.org |publisher=[[EQUATOR Network]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220929172737/https://www.equator-network.org/toolkits/developing-a-reporting-guideline/developing-your-reporting-guideline/ |archive-date=29 September 2022 |language=en |url-status=live}}</ref> Since this advice was made in 2010, two systematic reviews have found that fewer than 30% of published reporting guidelines incorporated Delphi methods into the development process.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Wang X, Chen Y, Yang N, Deng W, Wang Q, Li N, Yao L, Wei D, Chen G, Yang K | display-authors = 6 | title = Methodology and reporting quality of reporting guidelines: systematic review | journal = BMC Medical Research Methodology | volume = 15 | issue = 74 | pages = 74 | date = September 2015 | pmid = 26395179 | pmc = 4579604 | doi = 10.1186/s12874-015-0069-z | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Banno M, Tsujimoto Y, Kataoka Y | title = The majority of reporting guidelines are not developed with the Delphi method: a systematic review of reporting guidelines | journal = Journal of Clinical Epidemiology | volume = 124 | pages = 50–57 | date = August 2020 | pmid = 32302679 | doi = 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.010 | s2cid = 215809096 }}</ref>

=== Online Delphi systems ===