Delphi techniques to find consensus in the health sciences. A methodological reflection (DEFLEX)

德尔菲技术被用于健康科学，特别是寻找共识。然而，研究表明，除其他外，分析中存在许多分散的修改和统计错误。本项目旨在改进德尔菲程序的执行方式，并在使用这些技术寻求共识时提高数据质量。三个因素进行了检查，根据目前的研究，有判断的形成和建立共识的影响。这些因素包括专家小组的组成、调查设计以及如何提供反馈。这些因素中的每一个都是在不同的德尔菲回合中考虑的。在这样做的同时，注意的是不仅是目前的变化，德尔菲技术，而且对一般的方法论的辩论，受影响的群体的参与，定性和定量数据的结合，并在分析中的在线调查的特定方面。在此之上的水平，两个研究问题进行：1。影响共识发现的因素分析：这背后的假设是，除了主题和内容相关的方面，还有个人，方法或务实的研究因素，影响参与的动机和形成判断的智力要求过程，然后也影响共识发现。基于此，本文分析了德尔菲法在研究和判断行为中的应用，包括多轮德尔菲法。根据优化满意理论，它认为，在心理上的受访者在德尔菲程序有很高的意愿，由于他们的专业利益，智力上的问题和问题，以达到一个有充分根据的和“最佳”的判断。为此，他们利用自己的专业知识和经验，同时也考虑到前几轮德尔菲的反馈和外部来源的知识。对这些影响因素进行了定量、定性和实验分析。2.制定有条不紊的质量标准和指导方针，进行德尔菲程序，以寻求共识，这是由国际德尔菲专家评估。有条不紊的方法在设计上是复杂和多元的。为了分析专家的判断行为，将采用系统综述、范围界定综述、认知专家访谈、实验、德尔菲程序评估以及对已完成的德尔菲研究的二次分析。收集这些证据的目的是为德尔菲程序的质量标准和指南制定初步建议。这些建议将在一项单独的德尔菲研究中由国际知名的德尔菲专家进行评估。

Delphi techniques are used in the health sciences especially to find consensus. However, studies show, among other things, that there are many diffuse modifications and statistical errors in analyses. This project aims to improve how Delphi procedures are conducted and the quality of the data when these techniques are used to find consensus. Three factors are examined, which, according to the current research, have an influence on judgment formation and consensus building. These factors include expert panel composition, survey design, and how feedback is given. Each of these factors is looked at over the course of different Delphi rounds. While doing so, attention is paid not only to the current changes to Delphi techniques, but also to general methodological debates about the participation of affected groups, the combination of qualitative and quantitative data, and the particular aspects of online surveys in the analyses. On a level above this, two research questions are pursued: 1. Analysis of factors that influence consensus finding: Behind this is the assumption that, in addition to subject matter and content-related aspects, there are also personal, methodical or pragmatic research factors that influence the motivation to participate and the intellectually demanding process of forming judgments, which then also influence consensus finding. For this reason, the practice of using Delphi procedures in research and judgment behavior are analyzed, including over multiple Delphi rounds. According to the optimizing-satisficing theory, it is argued that psychologically the respondents in Delphi procedures have a high degree of willingness, due to their professional interests, to intellectually grapple with the questions and issues in order to arrive at a well-founded and "optimal" judgment. To do this, they draw upon their own expertise and experience while also considering the feedback from previous Delphi rounds and knowledge from external sources. The analysis of these influencing factors is carried out quantitatively, qualitatively and experimentally. 2. Formulating methodical quality standards and guidelines for conducting Delphi procedures to find consensus, which are evaluated by the international Delphi-experts. The methodical approach is complex and pluralistic in design. To analyze the judgment behavior of experts, a systematic review, a scoping review, cognitive expert interviews, an experiment, an evaluation of Delphi procedures, and a secondary analysis of completed Delphi studies will be applied. This collection of evidence aims at formulating initial recommendations for quality standards and guidelines for Delphi procedures. These proposed recommendations will then be evaluated in a separate Delphi study with internationally regarded Delphi experts.