UNASSIGNED: In Ireland and internationally, small-group learning (SGL) has been shown to be an effective way of delivering continuing medical education (CME) and changing clinical practice.
UNASSIGNED: This study sought to determine the benefits and limitations, as reported by Irish GPs, of the change of CME-SGL from face-to-face to online learning during COVID.
UNASSIGNED: GPs were invited to participate via email through their respective CME tutors. The first of three rounds of a survey using the Delphi method gathered demographic information and asked GPs about the benefits and/or limitations of learning online in their established small groups. Subsequent rounds obtained a consensus opinion.
UNASSIGNED: Eighty-eight GPs across Ireland agreed to participate. Response rates varied from 62.5% to 72% in different rounds. These GPs reported that attending their established CME-SGL groups allowed them to discuss the practical implications of applying guidelines in COVID care into practice (92.7% consensus), reviewing new local services and comparing their practice with others (94% consensus); helping them feel less isolated (98% consensus). They reported that online meetings were less social (60% consensus), and informal learning that occurs before and after meetings did not take place (70% consensus). GPs would not like online learning to replace face-to face-CME-SGL after COVID (89% consensus).
UNASSIGNED: GPs in established CME-SGL groups benefited from online learning as they could discuss how to adapt to rapidly changing guidelines while feeling supported and less isolated. They report that face-to-face meetings offer more opportunities for informal learning.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric assessment (GA) is a multidimensional process that disrupts the primary health care (PHC) referral system. Accessing consistent data is central to the provision of integrated geriatric care across multiple healthcare settings. However, due to poor-quality data and documentation of GA, developing an agreed minimum data set (MDS) is required. Therefore, this study aimed to develop a GA-MDS in the PHC referral system to improve data quality, data exchange, and continuum of care to address the multifaceted necessities of older people.
METHODS: In our study, the items to be included within GA-MDS were determined in a three-stepwise process. First, an exploratory literature search was done to determine the related items. Then, we used a two-round Delphi survey to obtain an agreement view on items to be contained within GA-MDS. Finally, the validity of the GA-MDS content was evaluated.
RESULTS: Sixty specialists from different health geriatric care disciplines scored data items. After, the Delphi phase from the 230 selected items, 35 items were removed by calculating the content validity index (CVI), content validity ratio (CVR), and other statistical measures. Finally, GA-MDS was prepared with 195 items and four sections including administrative data, clinical, physiological, and psychological assessments.
CONCLUSIONS: The development of GA-MDS can serve as a platform to inform the geriatric referral system, standardize the GA process, and streamline their referral to specialized levels of care. We hope GA-MDS supports clinicians, researchers, and policymakers by providing aggregated data to inform medical practice and enhance patient-centered outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Critical care of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) with acute brain injury (ABI) is notable for a lack of high-quality clinical evidence. Here, we offer guidelines for neurological care (neurological monitoring and management) of adults during and after ECMO support.
METHODS: These guidelines are based on clinical practice consensus recommendations and scientific statements. We convened an international multidisciplinary consensus panel including 30 clinician-scientists with expertise in ECMO from all chapters of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO). We used a modified Delphi process with three rounds of voting and asked panelists to assess the recommendation levels.
RESULTS: We identified five key clinical areas needing guidance: (1) neurological monitoring, (2) post-cannulation early physiological targets and ABI, (3) neurological therapy including medical and surgical intervention, (4) neurological prognostication, and (5) neurological follow-up and outcomes. The consensus produced 30 statements and recommendations regarding key clinical areas. We identified several knowledge gaps to shape future research efforts.
CONCLUSIONS: The impact of ABI on morbidity and mortality in ECMO patients is significant. Particularly, early detection and timely intervention are crucial for improving outcomes. These consensus recommendations and scientific statements serve to guide the neurological monitoring and prevention of ABI, and management strategy of ECMO-associated ABI.

OBJECTIVE: The use of digital technology in surgery is increasing rapidly, with a wide array of new applications from presurgical planning to postsurgical performance assessment. Understanding the clinical and economic value of these technologies is vital for making appropriate health policy and purchasing decisions. We explore the potential value of digital technologies in surgery and produce expert consensus on how to assess this value.
METHODS: A modified Delphi and consensus conference approach was adopted. Delphi rounds were used to generate priority topics and consensus statements for discussion.
METHODS: An international panel of 14 experts was assembled, representing relevant stakeholder groups: clinicians, health economists, health technology assessment experts, policy-makers and industry.
METHODS: A scoping questionnaire was used to generate research questions to be answered. A second questionnaire was used to rate the importance of these research questions. A final questionnaire was used to generate statements for discussion during three consensus conferences. After discussion, the panel voted on their level of agreement from 1 to 9; where 1=strongly disagree and 9=strongly agree. Consensus was defined as a mean level of agreement of >7.
RESULTS: Four priority topics were identified: (1) how data are used in digital surgery, (2) the existing evidence base for digital surgical technologies, (3) how digital technologies may assist surgical training and education and (4) methods for the assessment of these technologies. Seven consensus statements were generated and refined, with the final level of consensus ranging from 7.1 to 8.6.
CONCLUSIONS: Potential benefits of digital technologies in surgery include reducing unwarranted variation in surgical practice, increasing access to surgery and reducing health inequalities. Assessments to consider the value of the entire surgical ecosystem holistically are critical, especially as many digital technologies are likely to interact simultaneously in the operating theatre.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians from multiple professional backgrounds are increasingly using point-of-care ultrasound in clinical practice. Performing ultrasound is a complex skill, and training is required to ensure competency and patient safety. There is a lack of skilled trainers within health professions to meet this increasing educational demand. The role of sonographers in educating other health professionals in point-of-care ultrasound has not yet been well defined. Sonographers can provide ultrasound education interprofessionally, if equipped with appropriate clinical knowledge and educational skills.
METHODS: A Delphi consensus study was conducted to define the knowledge, skills and attributes required of sonographers teaching point-of-care ultrasound to other health professionals in Australia and New Zealand. Health professionals with subject matter expertise in the leadership, facilitation, and delivery of ultrasound education by sonographers were invited to participate.
RESULTS: There were 72 expert participants in survey round one, and 49 in round two. Participants included physicians, sonographers, and other health professionals. Consensus was reached on 31 competency items for sonographers teaching ultrasound interprofessionally, with agreement of greater than 94% reached by participants.
CONCLUSIONS: This consensus study has defined the knowledge, skills and attitudes required for sonographer competence in point-of-care ultrasound education. This is an important step to developing a training pathway for sonographers engaging in this emerging area.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to develop and apply a structured approach for prioritising topics for systematic reviews in public health, framed according to the readily applicable PICO format, which encourages the involvement of stakeholders\' preferences in a transparent matter.
UNASSIGNED: We developed a multi-stage process, consisting of a scoping and two Delphi stages with web-based surveys and invited public health stakeholders in Switzerland to participate: First, respondents specified topics for different public health domains, which were reformulated in a PICO format by content analysis. Second, respondents rated the topics using five stakeholder-refined assessment criteria. Overall rankings were calculated to assess differences between stakeholder groups and rating criteria.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 215 respondents suggested 728 topics altogether. The response rate in the two Delphi stages was 91.6% and 77.6%, respectively. Most top-rated review topics focused on the effectiveness of interventions providing education to different target groups, followed by interventions to increase access to specific healthcare services.
UNASSIGNED: Our approach encourages involvement of stakeholders in identifying priorities for systematic reviews and highlights disparities between stakeholders and between individual criteria.

BACKGROUND: The main task of dental schools is to prepare professional dentists with a high social responsibility. This study provided some practical suggestions from experts regarding desirable clinical settings, in order to establish an infrastructure for practical studies in Endodontics, Periodontics, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Restorative Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry, Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine, Prosthodontics, Oral Health, and Social Dentistry.
METHODS: This research was conducted using a modified Delphi technique in two rounds. The first round involved qualitative content analysis. Participants in interviews were selected purposeful and maximum diversity across the country. To determine the validity and reliability of the data, the four axes proposed by Lichon and Guba were utilized. The second round involved a researcher-made questionnaire, which consisted of 55 questions. This questionnaire was distributed to all dental schools across the country. The validity of the questionnaire were evaluated and by experts and then reviewed. The reliability of the tool was determined to be 0.96 using the alpha coefficient method.
RESULTS: The final codes from the interviews of the first round were divided into two categories: settings and educational programs. The final results of research were placed into 2 section: educational settings and instructors, and educational infrastructures. 70% participants agreed to use the college\'s clinical morning sessions. More than 80% agreed to start up a main clinic with the proposed structure and professors. The use of the hospitalization area also had an agreement of more than 80%. Additionally, community areas such as health service centers, welfare centers, special patient centers, factories, schools, etc. obtained an agreement of over 70%.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study are presented in the form of suggestions for improving the general dentistry program in relation to educational setting, educators, and educational infrastructures. The common agreement among participants regarding educational settings and their diversity, educational programs, and desired instructors reviewed in the research shows the necessity of reviewing and changing their educational programs in Endodontics, Periodontics, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Restorative Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry, Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine, Prosthodontics, Oral Health, and Social Dentistry.

OBJECTIVE: Manual therapy is a crucial component in rehabilitation education, yet there is a lack of models for evaluating learning in this area. This study aims to develop a foundational evaluation model for manual therapy learning among rehabilitation students, based on the Delphi method, and to analyze the theoretical basis and practical significance of this model.
METHODS: An initial framework for evaluating the fundamentals of manual therapy learning was constructed through a literature review and theoretical analysis. Using the Delphi method, consultations were conducted with young experts in the field of rehabilitation from January 2024 to March 2024. Fifteen experts completed three rounds of consultation. Each round involved analysis using Dview software, refining and adjusting indicators based on expert opinions, and finally summarizing all retained indicators using Mindmaster.
RESULTS: The effective response rates for the three rounds of questionnaires were 88%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. Expert familiarity scores were 0.91, 0.95, and 0.95; coefficient of judgment were 0.92, 0.93, and 0.93; authority coefficients were 0.92, 0.94, and 0.94, respectively. Based on three rounds of consultation, the model established includes 3 primary indicators, 10 secondary indicators, 17 tertiary indicators, and 9 quaternary indicators. A total of 24 statistical indicators were finalized, with 8 under the Cognitive Abilities category, 10 under the Practical Skills category, and 6 under the Emotional Competence category.
CONCLUSIONS: This study has developed an evaluation model for manual therapy learning among rehabilitation students, based on the Delphi method. The model includes multi-level evaluation indicators covering the key dimensions of Cognitive Abilities, Practical Skills, and Emotional Competence. These indicators provide a preliminary evaluation framework for manual therapy education and a theoretical basis for future research.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to develop an efficient tool for assessing children\'s fundamental motor skills, the \"Track style\" Children\'s Fundamental Movement Skills Test (TCFMST), based on theories of motor development integrated with Chinese cultural context and physical education teaching situations.
UNASSIGNED: Starting from a literature analysis, the study selected items from existing fundamental movement skill (FMS) assessments, textbooks, physical education and health standards, and children\'s movement guidelines to construct a pool of test items. Subsequently, the items were screened and optimized using the Delphi method. Finally, the feasibility, discrimination, difficulty, reliability, and validity of the constructed test were examined using testing methods.
UNASSIGNED: The TCFMST includes three dimensions: locomotive skills, body control skills, and manipulative skills, with a total of 10 items. The difficulty and discrimination of each item are appropriate; the correlation coefficients for retest reliability range from 0.789 to 0.943 (p < 0.01). The results of exploratory factor analysis indicate that the common factors align with the hypothesized three dimensions, indicating good structural validity of the test. The concurrent validity results show a correlation coefficient of -0.510 (p < 0.01) between the TCFMST and the total score of TGMD-3, indicating a moderate correlation between the two tests.
UNASSIGNED: The TCFMST developed in this study has good difficulty, discrimination, reliability, and validity. It also features strong operability, a short duration, and high interest. It can serve as an important tool for monitoring children\'s fundamental motor skill levels.

BACKGROUND: Effective risk communication about medicines is crucial to the success of all pharmacovigilance activities but remains a worldwide challenge. Risk communication has been conducted in Malaysia for decades, yet awareness on the communication methods remains low among healthcare professionals. While international guidelines are available, clear guidance on effectively communicating the risks of medicines in specific countries is scarce. This study aimed to establish a consensus on the priority strategies for enhancing risk communication about medicines by regulators.
METHODS: We conducted a two-round modified Delphi survey among local and international communication experts, and also recipients of medicines risk communication in Malaysia. We developed a list of 37 strategies based on the findings of our previous studies. In Round 1, participants were asked to rate the priority for each strategy using a 5-point Likert scale and suggest additional strategies via free-text comments. Strategies scoring a mean of ≥ 3.75 were included in Round 2. We defined consensus for the final list of strategies a priori as > 75% agreement. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Our final Delphi panel (n = 39, 93% response rate) comprised medicines communication experts from nine countries and Malaysian healthcare professionals. Following Round 1, we dropped 14 strategies and added 11 strategies proposed by panellists. In the second round, 21 strategies achieved consensus. The priority areas identified were to improve the format and content of risk communication, increase the use of technology, and increase collaboration with various stakeholders. Priority ratings for the strategy \"to offer incentives to pharmaceutical companies which maintain effective communication systems\" were significantly higher among recipients compared to communicators [χ2(1, N = 39) = 10.1; p = 0.039] and among local versus international panellists [χ2(1, N = 39) = 14.3; p = 0.007].
CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified 21 priority strategies, which were used to develop a strategic plan for enhancing medicines risk communication. This plan is potentially adaptable to all countries with developing pharmacovigilance systems. The difference in views between communicators and recipients, as well as local and international panellists, highlights the importance of involving multiple stakeholders in research.