目的:通过共识开发仪表板模型,以标准化和促进西班牙医院药房服务研究活动的评估。
方法:按照改良的德尔菲法,分5个阶段进行研究:协调小组的组成,详细阐述场景列表,选择参与中心,场景列表的评估,并对结果进行分析。协调小组设计了一份包含114个问题的问卷。包括一般研究问题和不同的情景(指标)以形成仪表板。出版物数量最多的医院药房服务被确定参加Delphi咨询。进行了两轮磋商,评估了每种情况下测量的“需要”和/或“可行性”,使用从1(最低得分)到9(最高得分)的数字量表。
结果:十六医院药房服务,属于8个不同的自治区,参加了德尔福咨询。在两轮磋商中,总共有100%的人回答了所有问题。据认为,医院药房服务应该有一个研究仪表板(需要=100%),具有基本结构和所有它们的通用最小数据集(需要=87.5%)。在区分医院药房服务部门领导的研究项目与医院药房服务部门合作的其他小组领导的研究项目(需要=87.5%)方面达成了共识,并根据这些项目是单中心还是多中心,对这些项目的领导进行了定义。就形成仪表板的40项指标达成共识,评估出版物(13个指标),人力资源(12个指标),研究项目(9个指标),博士论文(4个指标),和专利和知识产权注册(2个指标)。
结论:这是第一个为评估医院药房服务的研究活动而开发的共识仪表板,这将有助于系统地和持续地分析研究的生产力和影响。此外,它将允许它们之间的比较,并将有助于建立协同作用和确定趋势,模式,和挑战。
OBJECTIVE: To develop by consensus a dashboard model to standardise and promote the evaluation of research activity in Spanish Hospital Pharmacy Services.
METHODS: The study was carried out in 5 phases following the modified Delphi methodology: constitution of the coordinating group, elaboration of a list of scenarios, selection of participating centres, evaluation of the list of scenarios, and analysis of the results. The coordinating group designed a questionnaire with 114 questions. General research questions and different scenarios (indicators) were included to form the dashboard. The Hospital Pharmacy Services with the highest number of publications were identified to participate in the Delphi consultation. Two rounds of consultations were conducted in which the \"Need\" and/or \"Feasibility\" of their measurement was evaluated for each of the scenarios, using a numerical scale from 1 (lowest score) to 9 (highest score).
RESULTS: Sixteen Hospital Pharmacy Services, belonging to 8 different Autonomous Communities, participated in the Delphi consultation. A total of 100% of them responded to all the questions in the 2 rounds of consultations. It was considered that the Hospital Pharmacy Services should have a research dashboard (Need=100%) with a basic structure and a common minimum set of data for all them (Need=87.5%). The consensus was reached on distinguishing research projects led by the Hospital Pharmacy Services from those led by other groups in which the Hospital Pharmacy Services collaborate (Need=87.5%), and a definition was approved on the leadership of these projects according to whether they are single-centre or multicentre. A consensus was reached on 40 indicators to form the dashboard, which evaluates publications (13 indicators), human resources (12 indicators), research projects (9 indicators), doctoral theses (4 indicators), and patents and intellectual property registrations (2 indicators).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first consensus dashboard developed to evaluate the research activity of the Hospital Pharmacy Services, which will help to analyse the productivity and impact of research systematically and continuously. In addition, it will allow comparison between them and will help to establish synergies and identify trends, patterns, and challenges.