The Opinions of Multiple Stakeholders Towards Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework: Four Studies Using Delphi Techniques
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 已完成
- 入组人数
- 87
- 试验地点
- 1
- 主要终点
- Degree of consensus on feasible scientific methods and implementation strategies to generate evidence-based results of companion robots
研究概览
简要总结
The 4 studies aim to collect and examine the opinions from multiple stakeholders of gerontechnology product including the demand side, funder, supply side and academia on Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework. The Evaluation Framework will describe the essential knowledge to conduct an evaluation study for 10 selected gerontechnology product themes in local service settings. Specifically, we will (1) develop the indicators to determine if a companion robot, which is one of the product themes, is 'good'; (2) describe feasible study designs, implementation strategies and data analyses to generate evidenced-based evaluation results of companion robots; (3) outline strategies to build organizational research capacity to facilitate the evaluation of gerontechnology products.
In the Preparation Stage of all 4 studies, eligible participants will be recruited under purposive sampling and snowball sampling. Literature review, qualitative interviews and reflection on recent experience of evaluating gerontechnology products will be conducted. The opinions collected from the stakeholders will facilitate questionnaire development for the Delphi Stage. In the Delphi Stage of each of the 4 studies, there will be two rounds of quantitative validation of the grouped statements to generate consensus. Based on the opinions with consensus, the evaluation framework will be revised.
详细描述
Study design For research question (1), two studies, i.e. Study A1 and A2, will be conducted. Study A1 will conduct secondary data analyses on qualitative interviews and a two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques with end users. Study A2 will conduct focus groups and a two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques with decision makers. For research question (2), Study B will employ a focus group and a real-time two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques with decision makers. For research question (3), Study C will employ a real-time two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques study with decision makers.
For all 4 studies, in the first Delphi round, panellists will rate anonymously the agreement of the opinions on a 5-point Likert scale, give reasons for their ratings and suggest revisions. They will then be presented with the overall analyses and their ratings in the first round. In the second Delphi round, they will rate anonymously the agreement of the revisions, and give reasons for their ratings.
Procedures Preparation Stage In Study A1, for qualitative interviews with product users, we will do a secondary data analysis on individual qualitative interviews with 10 end users and 6 demand side - frontline. All of them were recruited from a residential care home and previously participated in an intervention study using companion robot. Their answers to questions related to 'good' companion robots will be analyzed by framework analysis. The analyzed opinions, upon the approval of the investigators, will be listed as the questionnaire items for use in Delphi part. Additional questionnaire items for the Delphi part will be added based on the literature that explored the opinions of the product users towards companion robots. For the Delphi part, 20 - 60 eligible visitors of Gerontech and Innovation Expo, a local exhibition that provides a platform for stakeholders to discuss and collaborate for broader adoption of gerontechnology, will be recruited by convenience sampling at the time of Expo registration. Their voluntary written consent will be sought before they complete the Delphi questionnaire. They will provide their email address and contact number, so that they could be contacted to do second Delphi round.
In Study A2, for focus groups with decision makers, 5 - 20 decision makers who have joined the development, evaluation or procurement process about companion robots will be purposively recruited by investigators of the project through phone calls and emails. In particular, demand side - managerial personnel will be recruited from the organizations that have adopted companion robots in their service units. Academia will be recruited by purposive sampling on the investigators who have publication(s) on gerontechnology in online databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL, EMBASE, and by convenient sampling on the nursing educators in the School of Nursing, the University of Hong Kong (HKU) will be conveniently recruited. Funders to be recruited are the representatives nominated Innovation and Technology Fund (that subsidizes social service units in renting and procuring gerontechnology products including companion robots) and. Supply side who expressed willingness to the Hong Kong Council of Social Service on providing companion robot(s) for trial test will be recruited. Similar to Study A1, their opinions will be analyzed by framework analysis. The analyzed opinions, upon the approval of the investigators, will be listed as the questionnaire items for use in Delphi part. For the Delphi part, 15 - 40 eligible visitors of Gerontech and Innovation Expo will be recruited following the same recruitment mechanism as the Delphi part in Study A1.
In Study B, the same focus groups participants who join the focus groups in Study A2 are simultaneously recruited. Their opinions in the focus groups will be analyzed by framework analysis. The analyzed opinions, upon the approval of the investigators, will be listed as the questionnaire items for use in Delphi part. For real-time Delphi questionnaires, in addition to the above decision makers, snowball sampling will be adopted to recruit the partners of Hong Kong Council of Social Service. These partners agreed to join discussions on gerontechnology, and they are eligible to join the Delphi part no matter they have or do not have experience in the development, evaluation or procurement process about companion robots. In total 8 - 15 panelists will be recruited.
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Observational
- 观察模型
- Cohort
- 时间视角
- Prospective
入排标准
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 是
入选标准
- 未提供
排除标准
- 未提供
结局指标
主要结局
Degree of consensus on feasible scientific methods and implementation strategies to generate evidence-based results of companion robots
时间窗: 3 months
The level of agreement on feasible scientific methods and implementation strategies to generate evidence-based results of companion robots. , the opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).
Degree of consensus on indicators of a "good" companion robot
时间窗: 3 months
The level of agreement on indicators of a "good" companion robot. , the opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).
Degree of consensus on strategies to build organizational research capacity facilitating the evaluation of gerontechnology products
时间窗: 3 months
The level of agreement on strategies to build organizational research capacity facilitating the evaluation of gerontechnology products. , the opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).
次要结局
未报告次要终点
研究者
Dr. Derek Yee-Tak Cheung
Assistant Professor
The University of Hong Kong
