Page 148 - Let them speak Towards a patient reported outcome measure set for

Chapter 6
Delphi rounds
In round one, consensus was reached on one out of 29 (3%) PROs considered
important (i.e., 60% or more of all participant groups responding ‘Yes’ for a
PRO). No consensus was reached on PROs considered not important. The
conceptualisation of five PROs (sleep, sensory over-responsivity, sensory
under-responsivity, receptive communication, and sexual functioning) was
supplemented (e.g., ‘an over-response to sensory stimuli’ was added to
the conceptualisation of ‘sensory over-responsivity’) following responses
from two or more experts. No additional PROs were suggested by two or
more participants. In round two, consensus was reached on 12 out of 29
(41%) PROs considered important. Again, no consensus was reached on
PROs considered not important. As no additional PROs were added to the
second survey, a third Delphi round was not conducted. Table 2 shows
the percentage of each participant group rating a PRO as important (light
green for ≥ 60%) and the consensus reached across all participant groups
(dark green for ≥ 60%) in round one and round two. The remaining 17
PROs on which consensus had not been reached, were evaluated by two
members of the research team (NvS, MvM). The PRO ‘participation/joining’
was eliminated, as the conceptualisation of this PRO overlapped with the
conceptualisation of the PRO ‘social functioning/participation’, as noted
by some of the participants. This resulted in 16 remaining PROs on which
consensus had not yet been reached, and these were discussed during the
consensus meetings.
146