You are not logged in.

Practical application of the Delphi technique in a bicultural mental health nursing study in New Zealand

Hardy, Derrylea J., O'Brien, Anthony P., Gaskin, Cadeyrn J., O'Brien, Anthony J., Morrison-Ngatai, Erina, Skews, Georgina, Ryan, Tom and McNulty, Neil 2004, Practical application of the Delphi technique in a bicultural mental health nursing study in New Zealand, Journal of advanced nursing, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 95-109, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2003.02969.x.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Practical application of the Delphi technique in a bicultural mental health nursing study in New Zealand
Author(s) Hardy, Derrylea J.
O'Brien, Anthony P.
Gaskin, Cadeyrn J.
O'Brien, Anthony J.
Morrison-Ngatai, Erina
Skews, Georgina
Ryan, Tom
McNulty, Neil
Journal name Journal of advanced nursing
Volume number 46
Issue number 1
Start page 95
End page 109
Publisher Wiley-Blackwell Publishing
Place of publication Oxford, England
Publication date 2004-04
ISSN 0309-2402
1365-2648
Keyword(s) Delphi technique
consensus
mental health nursing
standards of practice
New Zealand
Summary Background. Numerous studies have employed the Delphi technique to seek expert opinion about aspects of clinical practice. When researching literature on the Delphi technique, however, we discovered discrepancies in its application, and a lack of detail when reporting design, administration, and analysis methods. Such lack of specificity hinders the replicability and assessment of the clinical and cultural validity and reliability of Delphi studies.

Aim. The aim of this paper is to detail the practical application of the Delphi technique as a culturally and clinically valid means of accessing expert opinion on the importance of clinical criteria.

Methods. Reference is made to a bicultural New Zealand mental health nursing clinical indicator study that employed a three-round reactive Delphi survey. Equal proportions of Maori and non-Maori nurses (n = 20) and consumers (n = 10) rated the importance of 91 clinical indicator statements for the achievement of professional practice standards. Additional statements (n = 21) suggested by Delphi participants in round 1 were included in subsequent rounds. In round 2, participants explained the rating they applied to statements that had not reached consensus in round 1, and summarized responses were provided to participants in round 3. Consensus was considered to have been achieved if 85% of round 3 ratings lay within a 2-point bracket on the 5-point Likert-scale overall, or in one of the Maori nurse, non-Maori nurse, or consumer groups. A mean rating of 4·5 after round 3 was set as the importance threshold.

Findings. Consensus occurred overall on 75 statements, and within groups on another 24. Most statements (n = 86) reached the importance benchmark.

Conclusions. When rigorous methods of participant selection, group composition, participant feedback, and determination of consensus and importance are employed, the Delphi technique is a reliable, cost-effective means of obtaining and prioritizing experts judgements.
Language eng
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2003.02969.x
Field of Research 111099 Nursing not elsewhere classified
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2004, Blackwell Publishing
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30018471

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Nursing and Midwifery
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 41 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 43 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 549 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 01 Sep 2009, 15:14:29 EST by Rachael Wilson

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.