Delphi Survey on Cleft Palate OME Outcomes

The survey will be presented in an online format (see Additional files 3 and 4).
Round 1 content includes: the respondent’s clinical role; a list of outcomes to be scored, ordered alphabetically; and an option for a participant to add any additional outcomes and to provide a score for each outcome added.
At the beginning of the survey, participants will be presented with the information detailed in Additional file 3. They will be asked the key question: ‘What outcomes influence your management of children with cleft palate, with, or at high risk of, otitis media with effusion (OME)?’
Participants will be asked to score each of the outcomes listed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations scale of 1 to 9. In the Delphi exercise the scale will be presented in the format 1 to 9, with 1to 3 labelled ‘not important’, 4 to 6 labelled ‘important but not critical’ and 7 to 9 labelled ‘critical’ [17 (link)]. Participants will be provided with an option to add additional outcomes that they think are relevant together with a score for each outcome added.
Outcomes will be listed alphabetically to avoid potential weighting of outcomes caused by the order in which they are displayed.

Free full text: Click here

Harman N.L., Bruce I.A., Callery P., Tierney S., Sharif M.O., O’Brien K, & Williamson P.R. (2013). MOMENT – Management of Otitis Media with Effusion in Cleft Palate: protocol for a systematic review of the literature and identification of a core outcome set using a Delphi survey. Trials, 14, 70.

Publication 2013

Children Cleft palate Otitis media with effusion

Corresponding Organization :

Other organizations : University of Manchester, University of Liverpool

Top 5 similar protocols

Protocol cited in 13 other protocols

Variable analysis

independent variables

Respondent's clinical role

dependent variables

Scores for each outcome listed
Additional outcomes suggested by participants and their scores

control variables

The order in which the outcomes are listed (alphabetical) to avoid potential weighting of outcomes

Annotations

Based on most similar protocols

Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.

As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!