Identifying opportunities for nature engagement in cancer care practice and design: protocol for four-round modified electronic Delphi
AuthorBlaschke, S; O'Callaghan, CC; Schofield, P
Source TitleBMJ Open
PublisherBMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
AffiliationMelbourne School of Psychological Sciences
Medicine and Radiology
Document TypeJournal Article
CitationsBlaschke, S., O'Callaghan, C. C. & Schofield, P. (2017). Identifying opportunities for nature engagement in cancer care practice and design: protocol for four-round modified electronic Delphi. BMJ OPEN, 7 (3), https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013527.
Access StatusOpen Access
Open Access at PMChttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5353255
INTRODUCTION: Opportunities to engage with nature have shown relevance in experiences of health and recovery of patients with cancer and are attracting interest in cancer care practice and design. Such healthcare innovations can widen the horizon of possible supportive care solutions but require deliberate and rigorous investigation to ensure responsible action is taken and wastage avoided. This protocol outlines a study designed to solicit knowledge from relevant experts drawn from a range of healthcare practitioners, management representatives, designers and researchers to explore levels of opinion consensus for determining opportunities for, and barriers to, providing helpful nature engagement in cancer care settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A 4-round modified electronic Delphi methodology will be used to conduct a structured, iterative feedback process for querying and synthesising expert opinion. Round 1 administers an open-ended questionnaire to a panel of selected, relevant experts who will consider the own recommendations of patients with cancer for nature engagement (drawn from a preceding investigation) before contributing salient issues (items) with relevance to the topic. Round 2 circulates anonymised summaries of responses back to the experts who verify and, if they wish, reconsider their own responses. Rounds 3 and 4 determine and rank experts' top 10 items using a 10-point Likert-type scale. Descriptive statistics (median and mean scores) will be calculated to indicate the items' relative importance. Levels of consensus will be explored with consensus defined as 75% agreement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the Institution's Human Research Ethics Committee (blinded for review). It is anticipated that the results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented in a variety of forums.
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".
- Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References