Cited by 65Delphi Technique in ResearchMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsClinical practice guidelines implementation

The majority of reporting guidelines are not developed with the Delphi method: a systematic review of reporting guidelines

Banno, Masahiro, Tsujimoto, Yasushi, Kataoka, Yuki·2020·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract

Objectives Previous guidance of reporting guidelines recommends incorporating the Delphi method to integrate the opinions of experts for consensus when developing reporting guidelines. The purpose of this study was to clarify whether reporting guidelines typically use the Delphi method, what factors may be associated with the use of Delphi, and the reporting quality of Delphi. Study design and setting We included all reporting guidelines (n = 244) in the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency of health Research (EQUATOR) Network published after January 1, 2011. We assessed the trends and factors associated with conducting Delphi and the reporting quality of Delphi against current reporting guidelines. Results Of 244, 62 (25%) used Delphi for consensus building. The proportion of reporting guidelines that used Delphi was less than 10% in 2011 and 2012 and 29% in 2019. The year of publication, number of authors, and multiple and simultaneous publications were associated with the use of Delphi. The reporting quality of the Delphi method was moderate in most reporting guidelines developed with Delphi. Conclusions The use of Delphi in reporting guidelines is insufficient. Users and reviewers should carefully appraise the consensus building in the guidelines. Protocol and registration We applied a prespecified protocol to conduct this study (Banno M, Tsujimoto Y, Kataoka Y. Reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines: a protocol for a systematic analysis of th…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.010

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Banno, M., Tsujimoto, Y., & Kataoka, Y.
Affiliations
  • Scientific Research WorkS Peer Support Group (JP)
  • Kyoto University (JP)
Corresponding author
Banno, Masahiro
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-08
Volume
124
Pages
50-57
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3016524294
Cited by
65
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
reporting guidelines, Delphi method, consensus building, EQUATOR Network, reporting quality, guideline development, expert consensus
MeSH terms
Data Management, Delphi Technique, Humans, Research Design, Guidelines as Topic, Consensus, Research Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review