Cited by 24Delphi Technique in ResearchPhysical Activity and HealthHealthcare Quality and Management

A proposed adaptation of the European Foundation for Quality Management Excellence Model to physical activity programmes for the elderly - development of a quality self-assessment tool using a modified Delphi process

Open access
Marques, Ana I, Santos, Leonel, Soares, Pedro, Santos, Rute, Oliveira-Tavares, António, Mota, Jorge, Carvalho, Joana·2011·International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There has been a growing concern in designing physical activity (PA) programmes for elderly people, since evidence suggests that such health promotion interventions may reduce the deleterious effects of the ageing process. Complete programme evaluations are a necessary prerequisite to continuous quality improvements. Being able to refine, adapt and create tools that are suited to the realities and contexts of PA programmes for the elderly in order to support its continuous improvement is, therefore, crucial. Thus, the aim of this study was to develop a self-assessment tool for PA programmes for the elderly. METHODS: A 3-round Delphi process was conducted via the Internet with 43 national experts in PA for the elderly, management and delivery of PA programmes for the elderly, sports management, quality management and gerontology, asking experts to identify the propositions that they considered relevant for inclusion in the self-assessment tool. Experts reviewed a list of proposed statements, based on the criteria and sub-criteria from the European Foundation for Quality Management Excellence Model (EFQM) and PA guidelines for older adults and rated each proposition from 1 to 8 (disagree to agree) and modified and/or added propositions. Propositions receiving either bottom or top scores of greater than 70% were considered to have achieved consensus to drop or retain, respectively. RESULTS: In round 1, of the 196 originally-proposed statements (best practice principles), the experts modified 41, added 1 and achieved consensus on 93. In round 2, a total of 104 propositions were presented, of which experts modified 39 and achieved consensus on 53. In the last round, of 51 proposed statements, the experts achieved consensus on 19. After 3 rounds of rating, experts had not achieved consensus on 32 propositions. The resulting tool consisted of 165 statements that assess nine management areas involved in the development of PA programmes for the elderly. CONCLUSION: Based on experts' opinions, a self-assessment tool was found in order to access quality of PA programmes for the elderly. Information obtained with evaluations would be useful to organizations seeking to improve their services, customer satisfaction and, consequently, adherence to PA programmes, targeting the ageing population.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1479-5868-8-104

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Evidence shows that the involvement of all relevant stakeholders-children, families, teaching staff and management-in the planning of an intervention increases the likelihood of its success.

    “For example, evidence shows that the involvement of all relevant stakeholders—children, families, teaching staff and management—in the planning of an intervention increases the likelihood of its success (102–108).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Eccles J Gootman J Quality: building the evidence base Forum Focus 2003 1 Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment, Impact Strategies, Inc 1 7 http://www.forumforyouthinvestment.org July/August edition [Accessed 10 May 2010]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marques, A. I., Santos, L., Soares, P., Santos, R., Oliveira-Tavares, A., Mota, J., & Carvalho, J.
Affiliations
  • Universidade do Porto (PT)
  • University of Minho (PT)
  • University of Aveiro (PT)
Corresponding author
Marques, Ana I
Venue
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
Published
2011
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
104
ISSN
1479-5868 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116392054
Cited by
24
References
64
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Online (University of Wollongong) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
quality management, EFQM excellence model, self-assessment tool, good practice principles, Delphi consensus, health promotion interventions, quality improvement, population aging
MeSH terms
Aged, Aging, Delivery of Health Care, Delphi Technique, Europe, Geriatrics, Health Promotion, Humans, Quality Control, Sports, Program Evaluation, Exercise, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Internet, Consensus

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