ArticleQualitative health research2022
Moving on From the Delphi Study: The Development of a Physical Activity Training Programme Prototype Through Co-produced Qualitative Research.
Article in Qualitative health research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Like, we can't keep adding": a mixed methods study to explore the feasibility of implementing co-produced 24-Hour Movement Guideline content.Canadian medical education journal · 2025Article
- Development of the Whole Day Matters Toolkit for Primary Care: a consensus-building study to mobilize national public health guidelines in practice.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2025Article
- A Delphi Study of Expert Consensus on Chinese Medicine Syndrome Differentiation and Herbal Use for Early Breast Cancer.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This research developed from a co-produced project called Moving Social Work. The purpose of this ongoing project is to train social workers in how to promote physical activity for and to disabled people. The first stage of the project consisted of building evidence to design a training programme prototype. As part of this stage, a Delphi study was conducted to ask leading experts about what should be included in the prototype. Questionnaires were sent to participants until consensus was reached. In reflecting on the results, people involved in the study commented that there was more about the experts' opinions than percentages of agreement. Our co-production partners resolved that the Delphi was insufficient and called for detailed conversations with the experts. In response to this call, follow-up interviews with 10 experts who participated in the final questionnaire round of the Delphi were carried out. The interviews were co-produced, dyadic and data prompted. Dialogical inquiry was used to frame and co-analyse data. The results illuminate the capacity of qualitative research to justify, rectify, complicate, clarify, concretize, expand and question consensus-based evidence. The implications of the results for Moving Social Work are discussed. Beyond the empirical border of the project, wider contributions to literature are presented. As part of these, two key statements are highlighted and warranted: dialogical inquiry supports the practice of co-produced research, and Delphi studies should be followed by a Big Q qualitative study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.