98%
921
2 minutes
20
Introduction: A promising approach to assessing research impact draws on the Translational Science Benefits Model (TSBM), an evaluation model that tracks the applied benefits of research in four domains: Clinical and Medical; Community and Public Health; Economic; and Policy and Legislative. However, standardized methods to verify TSBM benefit data, to aid in aggregating impact data within quantitative summaries, do not currently exist.
Methods: A panel of 11 topic experts participated in a modified Delphi process for establishing content and face validity of a set of criteria for verifying qualitative TSBM data. Two survey rounds were completed by panelists, with a moderated discussion in between rounds to discuss criteria not reaching consensus. Criteria with panel consensus at or above 70% in the survey rounds were confirmed as validated.
Results: Criteria fell into 9 categories: Content Relevant, Project Related, Who, Reach, What, How, Novel, Documented Evidence, and When. The Delphi process yielded 197 total criteria across the 30 benefits characterized by the TSBM (range = 5-8 criteria per benefit).
Discussion: The results of this Delphi process lay the foundation for developing a TSBM coding tool for evaluating and quantifying TSBM data. Standardizing this process will enable data aggregation, group analysis, and the comparison of research impact across contexts.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12209970 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.76 | DOI Listing |
Disabil Rehabil
September 2025
Yang Memorial Methodist Social Service, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Purpose: This study aimed to develop an ICF core set for assessing stroke survivors in community-based rehabilitation settings in Hong Kong.
Material And Methods: A three-round Delphi process which involved 39 multidisciplinary experts in community-based rehabilitation services was conducted to reach consensus on a preliminary version of ICF core set for stroke survivors. The initial questionnaire included 130 second-level ICF categories while the panel was invited to suggest additional categories.
PLoS One
September 2025
Centre for Experimental Pathogen Host Research, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Background: Acute viral respiratory infections (AVRIs) rank among the most common causes of hospitalisation worldwide, imposing significant healthcare burdens and driving the development of pharmacological treatments. However, inconsistent outcome reporting across clinical trials limits evidence synthesis and its translation into clinical practice. A core outcome set (COS) for pharmacological treatments in hospitalised adults with AVRIs is essential to standardise trial outcomes and improve research comparability.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur Spine J
September 2025
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine through a Delphi process a list of outcomes measures for clinicians to use when assessing individuals with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS).
Methods: A three-phase Delphi process was conducted by the International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine (ISSLS) Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Taskforce, including two online surveys, two virtual meetings, and three in-person consensus meetings at the ISSLS annual conferences (2023-2025). Participants evaluated and ranked outcome measures for LSS, with final endorsement requiring > 66% agreement.
Eur J Prev Cardiol
September 2025
Department of Cardiology, Esbjerg and Grindsted Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Esbjerg, Denmark.
Aim: This study aimed to establish general consensus on a systematic needs assessment model to determine eligibility for cardiac rehabilitation (CR) as part of secondary prevention in individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF). Specific objectives included identifying relevant needs assessment criteria and establishing consensus on referral criteria.
Methods: A Delphi study was conducted following the ACCORD guidelines (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) with participation of an international, multi-disciplinary expert panel including physicians, nurses and other healthcare professionals, across primary and secondary care as well as academic research.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet
September 2025
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
The goal was to develop a pragmatic classification system for conditions associated with chronic pelvic pain (CPP), aiming to enhance diagnosis, management, education, and research of CPP. An international, multidisciplinary panel participated in a modified RAND/UCLA Delphi consensus. This panel included healthcare professionals, medical society representatives, experts, individuals with lived experience of pain, advocacy groups, researchers, educators, and journal editors.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF