Identifying Research Priorities for Patient Safety in Mental Health: An International Expert Delphi Study

Dewa et al. (2018) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

patient safety in mental health

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

Asia - Singapore; Australia - Australia; Australia - New Zealand; Europe - Denmark; Europe - Finland; Europe - Germany; Europe - Ireland; Europe - Netherlands; Europe - Sweden; Europe - Switzerland; Europe - United Kingdom; North America - USA

Why was it conducted at all?

Physical healthcare has dominated the patient safety field; research in mental healthcare is not as extensive but findings from physical healthcare cannot be applied to mental healthcare because it delivers specialised care that faces unique challenges. Therefore, a clearer focus and recognition of patient safety in mental health as a distinct research area is still needed.

What was the objective?

to identify future research priorities in the field of patient safety in mental health

What was the outcome?

a list of 79 research topics

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

Delphi; interview

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: interviews: with academic experts and with service user experts to ascertain their views on research priorities in patient safety in mental health. Step 2: data processing: thematic analysis: 117 priority statements extracted. Step 3: Delphi round 1: participants were asked to rate each statement, 38 statements reached consensus. Step 4: Delphi round 2: 79 statements, summary of the collated statement scores that did not reach agreement was circulated, participants were asked to re-rate based on group scores of round 1, 34 statements reached consensus. Step 5: Delphi round 3: participants were asked to re-rate statements to gain consensus, 6 statements reached consensus in round 3, in total 79 statements reached consensus

Which stakeholders took part?

Academic experts, service user experts. Interview: 9 academic experts. Delphi: 42 participants.

How were stakeholders recruited?

Academic experts satisfied the following inclusion criteria: published at least six articles in patient safety in the mental health field; had at least 5 years experience in patient safety in mental health and established reputation in patient safety in mental health, defined as having a high number of citations, a role at a national level or having made a significant impact to the academic field. Service user experts were recruited through a UK-based independent third-sector group. Inclusion criteria included: personal experience of mental health services and an ability to comment on patient safety-related issues. Service users were excluded if they were unable to provide informed consent due to being too physically or mentally unwell or if they were non-English speaking. Delphi: Potential service user experts were approached by email by selected third-sector organizations. The inclusion criteria for service users was the same as the interview criteria. The survey was also advertised on Twitter and in a third-sector newsletter.

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.