Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39273781›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Delphi Technique on Nursing Competence Studies: A Scoping Review.

Luís Furtado, Fábio Coelho, Sara Pina, Cátia Ganito, Beatriz Araújo, Cândida Ferrito

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Long lie: development of a definition using the Delphi method].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Luís FurtadoFaculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1649-023 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-4479-3877
Fábio CoelhoDepartment of Nursing, Mental Health and Gerontology, School of Health, University of the Azores, 9700-042 Angra do Heroísmo, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5275-2963
Sara PinaFaculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1649-023 Lisboa, Portugal.
Cátia GanitoFaculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1649-023 Lisboa, Portugal.
Beatriz AraújoFaculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1649-023 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0266-2449
Cândida FerritoFaculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, 1649-023 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2834-8573

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This scoping review was conducted under the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework. It included primary studies published until 30 April 2023, obtained through a systematic search across PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and MEDLINE databases. The review focused on primary studies that used the Delphi technique in nursing competence research, especially those related to defining core competency frameworks and developing instruments to assess professional competence. The goal was to analyze the different methodological approaches used by authors, synthesize them, and propose recommendations to enhance methodological rigor, reliability, and validity in the application of the Delphi technique. For this purpose, the following review question was established: "What is the available evidence on the use of the Delphi technique in the study of professional competence in nursing?". The extracted textual elements underwent a content analysis, resulting in dimensions established through an inductive approach. Twenty studies were included, yielding insights into diverse methodological options for conducting Delphi studies, organised around a set of dimensions: (1) preparatory procedures; (2) procedures for accessing and selecting experts; (3) acquisition of expert input; (4) data analysis and consensus; and (5) ethical and legal procedures and guarantees. The study's limitations include the inability to include certain studies due to a lack of response to requests for clarification from corresponding authors. Additionally, the primary studies' methodological quality was not assessed, which is another relevant aspect. The study's results offer valuable insights for researchers intending to utilise the Delphi technique within the context of the research referenced in the included studies. This information encompasses important methodological choices, highlighting their potential benefits and associated risks. The review was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework (Registration No: osf.io/kp2vw).

Indexed as

consensusDelphi techniqueexpert surveymethodological discussionnursingprofessional competencereview

Identifiers

PMID39273781
PMCPMC11395531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.