ArticleBMJ open2026
Single-round modified Delphi consensus to optimise the care of patients with sickle cell disease across multidisciplinary teams within the NHS.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSickle cell disease (SCD) is one of the most common inherited haemoglobinopathies worldwide and the most prevalent monogenic disorder in the UK. Real-world implementation of existing guidance remains variable particularly in emergency and community settings. The study aims to build national consensus among multidisciplinary stakeholders as a crucial first step towards standardising practice and improving outcomes.
designUsing a single-round modified Delphi methodology, a Steering Committee of six UK-based specialists identified key domains for discussion and generated 48 consensus statements relevant to the care of patients with SCD. Using a four-point
resultsIn total, 112 completed surveys were received. Consensus (≥75% agreement) was achieved for 46 of 48 statements (96%), including 32 (67%) that reached ≥90% agreement. The strongest consensus (>95%) was observed in statements emphasising the need for: broader access to specialist clinics and multidisciplinary care, prioritisation of community-based management and prevention of end-organ damage, education of emergency department staff on acute SCD management and improved HCP understanding of the multisystem nature of SCD and its psychosocial impacts. Two statements (S37, S43) did not meet the threshold, both concerning variability in adherence to national guidelines and allocation of dedicated SCD funding.
conclusionsA modified Delphi consensus achieved national multidisciplinary team expert recommendations to optimise NHS SCD care. These recommendations use expert opinion to clarify priorities, identify resource and education gaps, and aim to standardise practice for consistent, high-level patient care and robust outcome assessment.
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.