Application of the Delphi method to the development of common data elements for social drivers of health: A systematic scoping review.

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Yulia A Levites Strekalova, July D Nelson, Haley M Weber, Xiangren Wang, Sara M Midence
{"title":"Application of the Delphi method to the development of common data elements for social drivers of health: A systematic scoping review.","authors":"Yulia A Levites Strekalova, July D Nelson, Haley M Weber, Xiangren Wang, Sara M Midence","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibae020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Collaborative data science requires standardized, harmonized, interoperable, and ethically sourced data. Developing an agreed-upon set of elements requires capturing different perspectives on the importance and feasibility of the data elements through a consensus development approach. This study reports on the systematic scoping review of literature that examined the inclusion of diverse stakeholder groups and sources of social drivers of health variables in consensus-based common data element (CDE) sets. This systematic scoping review included sources from PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, WoS MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases. Extracted data included the stakeholder groups engaged in the Delphi process, sources of CDE sets, and inclusion of social drivers data across 11 individual and 6 social domains. Of the 384 studies matching the search string, 22 were included in the final review. All studies involved experts with healthcare expertise directly relevant to the developed CDE set, and only six (27%) studies engaged health consumers. Literature reviews and expert input were the most frequent sources of CDE sets. Seven studies (32%) did not report the inclusion of any demographic variables in the CDE sets, and each demographic SDoH domain was included in at least one study with age and sex assigned at birth included in all studies, and social driver domains included only in four studies (18%). The Delphi technique engages diverse expert groups around the development of SDoH data elements. Future studies can benefit by involving health consumers as experts.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"426-433"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11208287/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibae020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Collaborative data science requires standardized, harmonized, interoperable, and ethically sourced data. Developing an agreed-upon set of elements requires capturing different perspectives on the importance and feasibility of the data elements through a consensus development approach. This study reports on the systematic scoping review of literature that examined the inclusion of diverse stakeholder groups and sources of social drivers of health variables in consensus-based common data element (CDE) sets. This systematic scoping review included sources from PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, WoS MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases. Extracted data included the stakeholder groups engaged in the Delphi process, sources of CDE sets, and inclusion of social drivers data across 11 individual and 6 social domains. Of the 384 studies matching the search string, 22 were included in the final review. All studies involved experts with healthcare expertise directly relevant to the developed CDE set, and only six (27%) studies engaged health consumers. Literature reviews and expert input were the most frequent sources of CDE sets. Seven studies (32%) did not report the inclusion of any demographic variables in the CDE sets, and each demographic SDoH domain was included in at least one study with age and sex assigned at birth included in all studies, and social driver domains included only in four studies (18%). The Delphi technique engages diverse expert groups around the development of SDoH data elements. Future studies can benefit by involving health consumers as experts.

应用德尔菲法开发健康社会驱动因素的通用数据元素:系统性范围审查。
协作式数据科学需要标准化、统一化、可互操作和符合道德规范的数据。要开发出一套一致认可的要素,就需要通过共识开发方法来捕捉有关数据要素重要性和可行性的不同观点。本研究报告对文献进行了系统的范围界定审查,审查了将不同利益相关者群体和健康变量的社会驱动因素来源纳入基于共识的通用数据元素 (CDE) 集的情况。该系统性范围界定综述的资料来源包括 PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、WoS MEDLINE 和 PsycINFO 数据库。提取的数据包括参与德尔菲过程的利益相关者群体、CDE 集的来源,以及纳入 11 个个体和 6 个社会领域的社会驱动因素数据。在符合搜索字符串的 384 项研究中,有 22 项被纳入最终审查。所有研究都有与所开发的 CDE 集直接相关的医疗保健专家参与,只有 6 项(27%)研究有健康消费者参与。文献综述和专家意见是 CDE 集最常见的来源。七项研究(32%)未报告 CDE 集中包含任何人口统计学变量,每种人口统计学 SDoH 领域至少包含一项研究,所有研究均包含出生时的年龄和性别,仅有四项研究(18%)包含社会驱动力领域。德尔菲(Delphi)技术让不同的专家组参与 SDoH 数据元素的开发。让健康消费者作为专家参与进来,对今后的研究大有裨益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Translational Behavioral Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989. TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信