ArticleBMC health services research2025
The development of the sustainability measure for healthcare using a modified Delphi process.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
Abstract
backgroundValid and reliable measures for assessing the sustainability of complex, multicomponent, and interdisciplinary healthcare interventions are lacking. The study objective was to develop a multidimensional instrument for use to assess the sustainability of complex, interdisciplinary, healthcare interventions implemented in acute care settings.
methodsContent experts participated in a modified Delphi study of electronic REDCap
resultsTen experts representing areas of quality improvement, sustainability, and implementation science participated in rounds 1 and 8 experts in rounds 2 and 3, respectively. Round 1 statements with a median value of < = 6 on the 10-point Likert scale or < = 3 on the 4- or 5-point Likert scale were retained. The items retained, modified, and added in Round 2 included 53 items. Questions rated by > 75% of the experts as important were retained for the final measurement; conversely, questions rated by ≤ 25% of the experts as important were discarded. Twenty-five items with associated %s expert ratings of "important" (between 25% and 75% from Round 2) were included in Round 3. The modified Delphi process resulted in a final 37-item scale.
conclusionsUsing a modified Delphi technique, experts reported varying perceptions of sustainability. However, commonalities in key areas were successfully translated into the Sustainability Measure for Healthcare for assessing the sustainability of complex, multicomponent interventions.
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.