ArticleBMJ open2025
Using a modified Delphi approach to develop and validate a digital self-management support checklist in bariatric surgery aftercare.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCurrent clinical practice in bariatric surgery follow-up care is highly heterogeneous, and patients have reported needing more and extended personalised support. Especially, they want more support on how to self-manage and cope with the changes and challenges of living with the chronic aspects of obesity and a changing body following surgery. The overall aim of this study protocol is to develop and validate a digital self-management support checklist in bariatric surgery aftercare.
methodsWe propose a protocol for a modified, electronic Delphi study design using qualitative and quantitative methods to develop and validate the content of the checklist. The study is divided into two phases: (1) generation of candidate checklist attributes and (2) validation of candidate checklist attributes. In Phase 1, two qualitative studies involving individual interviews with patients and focus groups with healthcare professionals will be conducted to derive context-specific knowledge. This knowledge will be combined with best-practice evidence and stakeholder input to generate candidate checklist attributes, that is, principles, items and features. In Phase 2, a two-round electronic Delphi survey with an expert panel will be conducted to assess the relevance, comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of candidate checklist attributes and to determine the final checklist attributes based on content validity results from the Delphi process. Reflexive thematic analysis will be used on qualitative data and descriptive statistics on quantitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, Region West (2023/676367). The Data Protection Officer at Førde Hospital Trust and collaborating hospital trusts have approved the project (4386-4386). The results will be presented at scientific conferences, published and open-accessed in international peer-reviewed journals.
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.