Objective: eHealth interventions can improve the health outcomes of people with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) by promoting healthy lifestyle behaviours. However, developing and implementing... Show moreObjective: eHealth interventions can improve the health outcomes of people with a low socioeconomic position (SEP) by promoting healthy lifestyle behaviours. However, developing and implementing these interventions among the target group can be challenging for professionals. To facilitate the uptake of effective interventions, this study aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators anticipated or experienced by professionals in the development, reach, adherence, implementation and evaluation phases of eHealth interventions for people with a low SEP.Method: We used a Delphi method, consisting of two online questionnaires, to determine the consensus on barriers and facilitators anticipated or experienced during eHealth intervention phases and their importance. Participants provided open-ended responses in the first round and rated statements in the second round. The interquartile range was used to calculate consensus, and the (totally) agree ratings were used to assess importance. Results: Twenty-seven professionals participated in the first round, and 19 (70.4%) completed the second round. We found a consensus for 34.8% of the 46 items related to highly important rated barriers, such as the lack of involvement of low-SEP people in the development phase, lack of knowledge among professionals about reaching the target group, and lack of knowledge among lower-SEP groups about using eHealth interventions. Additionally, we identified a consensus for 80% of the 60 items related to highly important rated facilitators, such as rewarding people with a low SEP for their involvement in the development phase and connecting eHealth interventions to the everyday lives of lower-SEP groups to enhance reach.Conclusion: Our study provides valuable insights into the barriers and facilitators of developing eHealth interventions for people with a low SEP by examining current practices and offering recommendations for future improvements. Strengthening facilitators can help overcome these barriers. To achieve this, we recommend defining the roles of professionals and lower-SEP groups in each phase of eHealth intervention and disseminating this study's findings to professionals to optimize the impact of eHealth interventions for this group. Show less
Introduction: The Dutch Solid Start program aims to improve the collaboration between the medical and social sector to offer every child the best start in life. Municipalities form local coalitions... Show moreIntroduction: The Dutch Solid Start program aims to improve the collaboration between the medical and social sector to offer every child the best start in life. Municipalities form local coalitions of partners within the medical and social sector to support parents and children during the first thousand days. The aim of this study was to develop an indicator set for coalitions to monitor their local Solid Start program.Methods: A modified Delphi study with three rounds was carried out among Dutch experts in Solid Start practice, policy and research (n = 39) to reach consensus.Results: The indicator set included 19 indicators covering the three phases of the Solid Start program: preconception, pregnancy and after birth (up to two years). Prioritized indicators included both social and medical topics, among which poverty, psychological/psychiatric problems, stress, smoking, cumulation of risk factors, preconception care, low literacy, premature birth, and intellectual disability. Additionally, a development agenda was established with topics and indicators that lacked data or clear operationalization (e.g. stress, unintended pregnancy, loneliness).Discussion and conclusion: The developed indicator set enhances the conversation between policymakers, managers, professionals and other stakeholders about the local situation and developments in order to prioritize interventions and policies. Next, the indicator set needs evaluation to assess its usefulness. Show less
Methodological bias can directly affect the interpretation of research data. Studies reporting on excavated skeletons represent a valuable source of information in medicine, dentistry, archaeology... Show moreMethodological bias can directly affect the interpretation of research data. Studies reporting on excavated skeletons represent a valuable source of information in medicine, dentistry, archaeology and anthropology, and forensic sciences. However, these studies represent a specific setting with their own methodology, for which no quality assessment tool is available. The aim was to develop a critical appraisal tool to assess the methodological quality of studies reporting on archaeologically excavated human skeletons. An international Delphi study was therefore conducted to support item generation and ensure content validity for a new tool. Experts from the following domains were consulted: dentistry, forensic sciences, archaeology and anthropology, general medicine, epidemiology, and statistics. Participants judged the relevance and comprehensiveness of items retrieved from the literature. Consensus was predefined as 75% agreement between experts, and achieved within two Delphi rounds. As a result, 44 and 32 participants completed the first and second Delphi rounds, respectively, achieving consensus on 17 items. This research provides the first evidence-based tool for the methodological assessment of studies reporting on archaeologically excavated skeletons. Clinicians and researchers can use this tool for critical appraisal of studies or when performing systematic reviews. Future research will focus on psychometric testing of the newly developed tool. Show less
Denman, D.; Kim, J.H.; Munro, N.; Speyer, R.; Cordier, R. 2019
Purpose: Given the barriers that inconsistent terminology poses for the Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) profession, this study aimed to develop an agreed-upon taxonomy with well-defined categories... Show morePurpose: Given the barriers that inconsistent terminology poses for the Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) profession, this study aimed to develop an agreed-upon taxonomy with well-defined categories for describing language assessment practices for children.Method: A taxonomy with illustrative terms for describing assessments across four aspects (modality/domain, purpose, delivery and form) was developed with reference to contemporary literature. In a three round Delphi study, SLPs with expertise in child language were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the taxonomy and provide feedback. Participants were also asked to apply the taxonomy by categorising assessments presented in case studies.Result: A total of 55 participants completed round one, while 43 and 32 completed rounds two and three respectively. Agreed consensus with the taxonomy was achieved in both rounds one and two, with at least 88% of participants agreeing with each aspect and 100% agreeing with the overall structure. In round three, an agreement was reached on 7/10 components for one case study and 4/10 for the other.Conclusion: The development of this taxonomy represents a significant step towards providing detailed terminology for describing language assessments. Future research is needed to investigate implementation strategies to facilitate consistent application of the taxonomy by SLPs. Show less
Maaden, T. van der; Steen, J.T. van der; Vet, H.C.W. de; Achterberg, W.P.; Boersma, F.; Schols, J.M.G.A.; ... ; Hertogh, C.M.P.M. 2015
