Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Health Serv Res. 2011 Dec;46(6pt1):2005-18. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01297.x. Epub 2011 Jul 25.

Assessment of a novel hybrid Delphi and Nominal Groups technique to evaluate quality indicators.

Author information

  • 1Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University CHP/PCOR, 117 Encina Commons, Stanford, CA 94305-6019, USA. smdavies@stanford.edu

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To test the implementation of a novel structured panel process in the evaluation of quality indicators.

DATA SOURCE:

National panel of 64 clinicians rating usefulness of indicator applications in 2008-2009.

STUDY DESIGN:

Hybrid panel combined Delphi Group and Nominal Group (NG) techniques to evaluate 81 indicator applications.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:

The Delphi Group and NG rated 56 percent of indicator applications similarly. Group assignment (Delphi versus Nominal) was not significantly associated with mean ratings, but specialty and research interests of panelists, and indicator factors such as denominator level and proposed use were. Rating distributions narrowed significantly in 20.8 percent of applications between review rounds.

CONCLUSIONS:

The hybrid panel process facilitated information exchange and tightened rating distributions. Future assessments of this method might include a control panel.

© Health Research and Educational Trust.

PMID:
21790589
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3393032
Free PMC Article

Images from this publication.See all images (1)Free text

Figure 1
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Blackwell Publishing Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk