Table 2.
Summary of Delphi rounds 1–3 rankings of reporting items
| Round 1 (N = 43) | Round 2 (N = 29) | Round 3 (N = 20) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original items (systematic review) | Rating scores | Category of importance (% of respondents)a | Revised items post round 1 | Rating scores | Category of importance (% of respondents)a | Revised items post round 2 | Item rankingb | ||||
| Mean (SD) | Ess. | Imp. | Notimp. | Mean (SD) | Ess. | Imp. | Notimp. | ||||
| Programme Preparation | Programme Preparation | Programme Preparation | |||||||||
| 1. Programme name | 6.9 (2.2) | 58.1 | 37.2 | 4.7 | 1. Programme name | 7.2 (1.7) | 62.1 | 34.5 | 3.5 | 1. Programme name | Suppl. |
| 2. Overall goal/objectives – anticipated impact | 8.8 (0.6) | 97.7 | 2.3 | – | 2. Objectives and anticipated effects | 8.7 (0.7) | 96.6 | 3.5 | – | 2. Objectives and anticipated effects | Ess. |
| 3. Target population | 8.4 (1.4) | 93.0 | 4.7 | 2.3 | 3. Target population and area | 8.5 (0.8) | 96.6 | 3.5 | – | 3. Target population and area | Ess.c |
| 4. Organization/agency | 6.4 (2.0) | 48.8 | 44.2 | 7 | 4. Partners and stakeholder involvement | 7 (1.5) | 65.5 | 34.5 | – | 4. Partners and stakeholder involvement | Suppl. |
| 5. Funding source | 6.2 (1.7) | 39.5 | 58.1 | 2.3 | 5. Funding source | 6.4 (1.7) | 44.8 | 48.4 | 6.9 | 5. Funding source | Suppl. |
| 6. Programme design process | 7.2 (1.6) | 69.8 | 27.9 | 2.3 | 6. Programme design process | 7 (1.5) | 62.1 | 37.9 | 6. Programme design process | Suppl. | |
| 7. Theoretical foundation | 7.3 (1.8) | 79.1 | 16.3 | 4.7 | 7. Theory and/or logic model | 7.6 (1.4) | 82.8 | 13.8 | 3.5 | 7. Theory and/or logic model | Ess. |
| 8. Program manual | 6.7 (1.6) | 55.8 | 41.9 | 2.3 | 8. Program manual | 5.8 (1.8) | 41.4 | 48.3 | 10.3 | 8. Program manual | Suppl. |
| 9. Implementation strategy | 7.8 (1.4) | 81.4 | 18.6 | – | 9. Implementation strategy | 7.8 (1.2) | 82.8 | 17.2 | – | 9. Implementation strategy | Ess. |
| 10. Evaluation plans | 8.4 (1.1) | 93.0 | 7.0 | – | 10. Evaluation plans | 7.9 (1.2) | 85.7 | 14.3 | – | 10. Evaluation plans | Ess. |
| 11. Ethical considerations | 7.4 (1.4) | 72.4 | 27.6 | – | 11. Ethical considerations | Suppl. | |||||
| 12. Dissemination plans | 6.5 (1.9) | 55.2 | 41.4 | 3.5 | 12. Dissemination plans | Suppl. | |||||
| 11. Piloting of activities | 79.1 | 20.9 | – | 13. Piloting of activities | 7 (1.2) | 62.1 | 37.9 | – | 13. Piloting of activities | Suppl. | |
| Programme | – | Programme | – | Programme | |||||||
| Implementation | Implementation | Implementation | |||||||||
| 12. Components/activities | 8.4 (1.1) | 88.4 | 11.6 | – | 14. Components/activities | 8.3 (1.2) | 89.7 | 10.3 | – | 14. Components/ activities |
Ess. |
| 13. Complexity | 7.2 (1.4) | 66.7 | 33.3 | – | 15. Complexity | 6.8 (1.2) | 37.9 | 62.1 | – | Merged with #14 | |
| 14. Standardisation | 7.5 (1.3) | 81.4 | 18.6 | – | 16. Standardisation and tailoring | 7.7 (1) | 86.2 | 13.8 | – | 15. Standardisation and tailoring | Ess. |
| 15. Innovation | 6.2 (1.7) | 44.2 | 48.8 | 7.0 | Merged with #14 | ||||||
| 16. Materials | 7.2 (1.3) | 72.1 | 27.9 | – | 17. Materials | 6.8 (1.6) | 58.6 | 37.9 | 3.5 | 16. Materials | Suppl. |
| 17. Timing (when) | 8.0 (1.4) | 83.3 | 16.7 | – | 18. Timing (when) | 7.9 (1.4) | 79.3 | 20.7 | – | 17. Timing (when) | Ess.c |
| 18. Setting (where) | 8.5 (1.0) | 92.9 | 7.1 | – | 19. Setting (where) | 8.6 (0.8) | 96.6 | 3.5 | – | 18. Setting (where) | Ess. |
| 19. Dose and intensity (how much) | 8.4 (1.1) | 92.9 | 7.1 | – | 20. Dose and intensity (how much) | 8 (1.2) | 86.2 | 13.8 | – | 19. Dose and intensity (how much) | Ess. |
| 20. Provider characteristics (by whom) | 7.3 (1.5) | 71.4 | 28.6 | – | 21. Provider/staff characteristics (by whom) | 7.3 (1.4) | 72.4 | 27.6 | – | 20. Provider/staff characteristics (by whom) | Suppl. |
| 21. Provider/staff training | 7.3 (1.6) | 69.1 | 31 | – | 22. Provider/staff training | 7.1 (1.7) | 65.5 | 31.0 | 3.5 | 21. Provider/staff training | Suppl. |
| 22. Provider reflexivity | 6.4 (1.9) | 54.8 | 35.7 | 9.5 | 23. Provider reflexivity | 6.2 (1.4) | 46.4 | 53.6 | – | 22. Provider reflexivity | Suppl. |
| 23. Participant recruitment | 7.8 (1.4) | 78.6 | 21.4 | – | 24. Participant recruitment | 7.5 (1.3) | 75.0 | 25.0 | – | 23. Participant recruitment | Suppl. |
| 24. Participants (who) | 8.2 (1.1) | 92.9 | 7.1 | – | 25. Participants (who) | 8.2 (1.2) | 86.2 | 13.8 | – | 24. Participants (who) | Ess. |
| 25. Participant preparation | 7.0 (1.6) | 66.7 | 31.0 | 2.3 | 26. Participant preparation | 7.1 (1.4) | 60.7 | 39.3 | – | 25. Participant preparation | Suppl. |
| 26. Methods used to deliver activities (how) | 8.0 (1.2) | 85.7 | 14.3 | – | 27. Methods used to deliver activities (how) | 8 (1.2) | 82.8 | 17.2 | – | 26. Methods used to deliver activities (how) | Ess. |
| 27. Efforts to ensure fidelity of participants | 7.7 (1.3) | 82.9 | 17.1 | – | 28. Efforts to increase and sustain participation | 7.6 (1.3) | 79.3 | 20.7 | – | 27. Efforts to increase and sustain participation | Ess.c |
| 28. Efforts to ensure fidelity of providers/staff | 7.9 (1.1) | 88.1 | 11.9 | – | 29. Efforts to ensure provider adherence to protocol | 7.7 (1.2) | 85.7 | 14.3 | – | 28. Efforts to ensure provider adherence to protocol | Ess. |
| 30. Monitoring of the programme implementation | 7.6 (1.2) | 82.1 | 17.9 | – | 29. Monitoring of the programme implementation | Ess. | |||||
| 29. Acceptability | 7.9 (1.1) | 88.1 | 11.9 | – | 31. Acceptability | 7.3 (1.4) | 72.4 | 27.6 | – | 30. Acceptability | Suppl. |
| 30. Appropriateness | 7.7 (1.2) | 85.7 | 14.3 | – | 32. Appropriateness | 7.2 (1.2) | 69.0 | 31.0 | – | 31. Appropriateness | Suppl |
| 31. Feasibility/Practicality | 8.0 (1.1) | 90.5 | 9.5 | – | 33. Feasibility/Practicality | 7.9 (1.0) | 89.7 | 10.3 | – | 32. Feasibility/Practicality | Ess. |
| 32. Adoption | 8.5 (1.0) | 92.9 | 7.1 | – | 34. Adoption | 8.2 (0.9) | 96.6 | 3.5 | – | 33. Adoption | Ess. |
| 33. Coverage/Reach | 8.1 (1.1) | 90.5 | 9.5 | – | 35. Coverage/Reach | 8 (1.1) | 93.1 | 6.9 | – | 34. Coverage/Reach | Ess. |
| 34. Attrition | 8.1 (1.1) | 88.1 | 11.9 | – | 36. Attrition | 7.7 (1.1) | 82.8 | 17.2 | – | 35. Attrition | Ess. |
| 35. Unexpected end of programme | 8.5 (0.8) | 97.6 | 2.4 | – | 37. Unexpected end of programme | 8.1 (1.2) | 89.3 | 10.7 | – | 36. Unexpected end of programme | Ess, |
| 36. Reversibility | 7.1 (1.3) | 65.8 | 34.2 | – | 38. Reversibility | 6.5 (1.3) | 46.2 | 53.9 | – | 37. Reversibility | Suppl. |
| 37. Contamination of activities | 7.3 (1.4) | 69.1 | 30.9 | – | 39. Contamination of activities | 7.3 (1.0) | 74.1 | 25.9 | – | Merged with #35 | |
| 38. Fidelity | 8.2 (1.0) | 90.2 | 9.8 | – | 40. Fidelity | 8.4 (0.9) | 92.9 | 7.1 | – | 38. Fidelity | Ess. |
| 39. Reasons for low fidelity | 7.9 (1.1) | 88.1 | 11.9 | – | 41. Reasons for low fidelity | 7.9 (1.1) | 85.2 | 14.8 | – | Merged with #38 | |
| 40. Sustainability | 8.3 (1.1) | 88.1 | 11.9 | – | Moved to #49 | ||||||
| 41. Costs of implementation | 8.2 (1.0) | 92.9 | 7.1 | – | 42. Costs of implementation | 8.1 (1.1) | 93.1 | 6.9 | – | 39. Implementation costs/resources | Ess. |
| Programme Evaluation | – | Programme Evaluation | – | Programme Evaluation | |||||||
| 42. Process evaluation methods | 8.5 (0.9) | 95.1 | 4.9 | – | 43. Process evaluation methods | 8.3 (1.0) | 89.7 | 10.3 | – | 40. Process evaluation methods | Ess. |
| 43. Effect of implementation process on results | 8.3 (1.0) | 95.0 | 5.0 | – | 44. Effect of implementation process on results | 8.1 (1.0) | 89.7 | 10.3 | – | 41. Effect of implementation process on results | Ess. |
| 44. External events affecting implementation | 8.1 (0.9) | 95.1 | 4.9 | – | 45. Factors affecting implementation | 8.2 (0.9) | 93.1 | 6.9 | – | 42. Factors affecting implementation | Ess. |
| 45. Ethical considerations | 8.2 (0.9) | 95.1 | 4.9 | – | Moved to #11 | ||||||
| 46. Implementation barriers and facilitators | 8.1 (0.9) | 97.6 | 2.4 | – | Moved to #50 | ||||||
| 47. Strengths and limitations | 8.2 (0.9) | 95.2 | 4.8 | – | Moved to #50 | ||||||
| 48. Outcome evaluation methods | 8.5 (1.2) | 90.5 | 9.5 | – | 46. Outcome evaluation methods | 8.4 (0.8) | 96.6 | 3.5 | – | 43. Outcome evaluation methods | Ess. |
| 49. Unexpected/negative effects | 8.3 (0.8) | 97.6 | 2.4 | – | 47. Unexpected programme effects | 8.2 (0.9) | 93.1 | 6.9 | – | 44. Unexpected programme effects | Ess. |
| 50. Differential effects | 8.0 (1.1) | 88.1 | 11.9 | – | 48. Differential effects | 8.2 (1) | 89.7 | 10.3 | – | 45. Differential effects | Ess. |
| 49. Sustainability | 7.8 (0.9) | 92.6 | 7.4 | – | 46. Sustainability | Ess. | |||||
| 50. Strengths and limitations (lessons learnt) | 8.4 (0.9) | 96.4 | 3.6 | – | 47. Strengths and limitations (lessons learnt) | Ess. | |||||
aEssential (Ess.), Important (Imp.), Not important (Not imp)
bFor round 3, essential items had to be marked as essential for the PRS by at least 80% of participants, while items below this cut-point could be considered as supplementary items
cItems ranked as essential by 70–79% of participants were considered borderline essential