Table 2.
Detailed summary of numeric results for Round 2.
| Statement | Consensus achieved | % of consensus | Minimum score | Maximum score | |
| Ethical inclusions |
|
||||
|
|
Amnesty for all platform users in that they will not be referred to any law enforcement agencies, their employer or regulatory body for either disciplinary or investigative proceedings in any case | No | N/A | Not a priority 2/44 (5%) |
High priority 9/44 (21%) |
|
|
Prompting platform users automatically to remind them of their responsibilities to their professional codes of conduct | No | N/A | Somewhat a priority 2/44 (5%) |
High priority 9/44 (21%) |
| Inclusions of therapeutic support |
|
||||
|
|
The inclusion of information designed to inform midwives as to where they can access legal help and advice | Yes (high/essential Priority) | 65.90% | Not a priority 0/44 (0%) |
High priority 17/44 (39%) |
|
|
Giving platform users the ability to share extended personal experiences for other platform users to read | No | N/A | Not a priority 0/44 (0%) |
High priority 11/44 (25%) |
|
|
The inclusion of a Web-based peer-to-peer discussion chat room | Yes (moderate/high priority) | 63.60% | Not a priority 1/44 (2%) |
Moderate priority 15/44 (34%) |
|
|
Giving platform users the ability to communicate any work or home-based subjects of distress | No | N/A | Not a priority 1/44 (2%) |
Moderate/essential priority 11/44 (25%) |
| Intervention design and practical inclusions |
|
||||
|
|
An interface which does not resemble NHS, employer or other generic health care platforms | No | N/A | Not a priority 1/44 (2%) |
Essential priority 13/44 (30%) |
|
|
A simple, anonymized email log-in procedure which allows for continued contact and reminders which may prompt further platform usage | No | N/A | Not a priority/low Priority 0/44 (0%) |
High priority 14/44 (32%) |
|
|
An automated moderating system where “key words” would automatically initiate a moderated response | No | N/A | Low priority 2/44 (5%) |
Neutral 13/44 (30%) |
| New items for consideration |
|
||||
|
|
An interface which resembles and works in a similar way to current popular and fast pace social media channels (eg, Facebook) | No | N/A | Not a priority 0/44 (0%) |
Neutral 12/44 (27%) |
|
|
The inclusion of midwives from around the world | No | N/A | Not a priority 3/44 (7%) |
Moderate priority 11/44 (25%) |
|
|
Proactive moderation (ie, users are able to block unwanted content and online postings are “pre-approved”) | Yes (high/essential priority) | 61.40% | Not a priority 1/44 (2%) |
High priority 15/44 (34%) |
|
|
Reactive moderation (ie, users are able to report inappropriate content to a system moderator for removal) | Yes (high/essential priority) | 70.50% | Not a priority 1/44 (2%) |
High priority 16/44 (36%) |
|
|
24/7 availability of the platform | Yes (high/essential priority) | 84.10% | Not a priority/low priority 0/44 (0%) |
Essential priority 25/44 (57%) |
|
|
The implementation of an initial simple user assessment using a psychological distress scale to prompt the user to access the most suitable support available | Yes (moderate/high priority) | 70.40% | Not a priority/somewhat priority 1/44 (2%) |
High priority 25/44 (39%) |
|
|
The gathering of anonymized data and concerns from users, only with explicit permission, so that trends and concerns may be highlighted at a national level. | No | N/A | Not/low/somewhat a priority 2/44 (5%) |
Essential priority 15/44 (34%) |
|
|
Access for a midwife's friends and family members | No | N/A | Essential priority 0/44 (0%) |
Not a priority 17/44 (39%) |
|
|
The follow up and identification of those at risk | Yes (high/essential priority) | 63.70% | Low/somewhat a priority 1/44 (2%) | Essential priority 16/44 (36%) |
|
|
The provision of a general statement about professional codes of conduct and the need for users to keep in mind their responsibilities in relation to them | No | N/A | Not a priority 1/44 (2%) |
Essential priority 12/44 (27%) |