Table 1.
Characteristics of the respondents to each round of the Delphi study
| Round 1 | Round 2 | Round 3 | Round 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of participants | 158 | 122 | 84 | 69 |
| Country/region (n) | ||||
| US | 24 | 21 | 18 | 13 |
| Canada | 15 | 7 | 6 | 6 |
| UK | 30 | 20 | 14 | 11 |
| Netherlands | 25 | 18 | 8 | 6 |
| Europe other (11 countries) | 37 | 32 | 24 | 21 |
| Australia/New Zealand | 16 | 12 | 9 | 8 |
| Asia | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Middle East | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| South America | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Unknown | 6 | 9 | 2 | 1 |
| Professional background (n)a | ||||
| Allied health care professional | 69 | 38 | 32 | 29 |
| Medical doctor | 19 | 9 | 4 | 4 |
| Clinimetrician/psychometrician | 33 | 19 | 15 | 12 |
| Epidemiologist | 30 | 19 | 13 | 12 |
| Statistician | 6 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Other | 54 | 27 | 23 | 19 |
| Unknown | 36 | 16 | 9 | |
| Current professional activity (n)a | ||||
| Clinician | 35 | 16 | 12 | 10 |
| Researcher | 146 | 81 | 64 | 57 |
| Journal editor | 8 | 6 | 4 | 3 |
| Other | 27 | 14 | 12 | 12 |
| Unknown | 36 | 16 | 9 | |
| Experience in qualitative research | ||||
| A lot-some/a little-none (%) | 65/35 | 67/33 | 71/29 | 70/30 |
| Unknown (n) | 36 | 16 | 9 | |
| Experience in development of PROMs | ||||
| A lot-some/a little-none (%) | 58/42 | 60/40 | 66/34 | 61/39 |
| Unknown (n) | 37 | 17 | 10 | |
| Experience in evaluation of measurement properties of PROMs | ||||
| A lot-some/a little-none (%) | 85/15 | 92/8 | 90/10 | 90/10 |
| Unknown (n) | 37 | 17 | 10 | |
| Experience in evaluation of content validity of PROMs | ||||
| A lot-some/a little-none (%) | 75/25 | 76/24 | 79/21 | 75/25 |
| Unknown (n) | 36 | 16 | 9 | |
| Experience in systematic reviews of PROMs | 70/30 | 72/28 | 72/28 | 70/30 |
| A lot-some/a little-none (%) | 36 | 16 | 9 | |
| Unknown (n) | ||||
| Ever used the COSMIN checklist | ||||
| Yes/no (%) | 82/18 | 80/20 | 79/21 | 82/18 |
| Unknown (n) | 36 | 16 | 9 | |
PROMs patient-reported outcome measures
aMultiple responses allowed