Research Priorities in Pediatric Onco‑Critical Care: An International Delphi Consensus Study
For which topic were research priorities identified?
pediatric onco-critical care
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
Europe - Belgium; Europe - Denmark; Europe - France; Europe - Germany; Europe - Italy; Europe - Netherlands; Europe - Norway; Europe - Spain; Europe - Sweden; Europe - Switzerland; Europe - United Kingdom
Why was it conducted at all?
Recognizing the need for international collaboration on this issue, the European Society for Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC) established, in collaboration with pediatric oncologists, the PICU Oncology Kids in Europe Research group (POKER), with the aim to design international optimal common harmonized care and a research agenda for the next decade, to ultimately improve the outcomes of children with cancer admitted to PICU.
What was the objective?
to design international optimal common harmonized care and a research agenda for the next decade, to ultimately improve the outcomes of children with cancer admitted to PICU
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 5 research topics
How long did the research prioritization take?
October 2018 - April 2019
Which methods were used to identify research priorities?
How were the priorities for research identified exactly?
Step 1: POKER consortium members drafted ten candidate research topics. Step 2: Delphi round 1: participants were asked to rate each topic, research topics meeting the a priori consensus thresholds for > 80% high priority were included in round 2 complemented with additional research topics suggested by participants. Step 3: Delphi round 2: survey with all round 1 topics and newly added topics, participants again asked to rate each topic, resulting in shortlist of 15 topics. Step 4: Delphi round 3: participants again asked to rate
Which stakeholders took part?
Pediatric intensivists and pediatric oncologists. Delphi round 1: 172 participants. Delphi round 2: 157 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
As commonly adopted in Delphi studies, the project team employed a purposive strategy. In their recruitment method, organizations and members of the POKER group invited respondents to participate in the study to increase the likelihood that invited individuals will respond and to allow for a selection of individuals who are considered to have the most relevant expertise. An invitation to participate was distributed among pediatric intensivists through the European Society of Paediatric Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC). Pediatric oncologists were invited by disseminating the survey through established relationships of the members of the POKER group or through existing collaborations within the framework of international pediatric oncology society working groups. Due to this ‘snowballing’ approach to recruitment, the project team were unable to identify a denominator of total people who received the survey, in order to calculate a response rate.
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.