Table 3.
Topics addressed and type of questions per round
| Topic addressed | Topic addressed in: | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Round 1 Introduction to themes, initial inventory of level of consensus |
Round 2 Feedback on Round 1 and revisiting themes on which no consensus existed |
Round 3 Exploration of consensus on sub-domains |
Round 4 Final consensus building |
|
| Participant characteristics | 6 open ended questions (such as age, gender, frequency of contact with people with DS). | Idem: same questions were presented to participants who had not participated in round 1. | ||
| Purpose of QI-set (e.g. transparency, quality improvement, auditing, insurance) | 9 purposes, rate importance | 12 propositionsa | 9 propositionsa | |
| Quality domains to be included in QI-set (e.g. coordinated care, person-centeredness, clinical outcome) | 10 itemsb and 1 proposition for children with DS; 10 itemsb and 1 proposition for adults with DS | 7 itemsb for children and adults with DS | 28 itemsb (sub-domains) | 1 propositiona |
| Healthcare disciplines to be included in QI-set (e.g. Down team, psychological care, physiotherapy) | 14 itemsb and 1 close-ended question for children with DS; 14 itemsb and 1 close-ended question for adults with DS |
6 propositions; 30 itemsb for children; 30 itemsb for adults with DS |
4 open-ended questions | 1 propositiona |
| Number and type (structure / process / outcome) of QIs | 2 close-ended questions |
2 propositions; 1 close-ended question |
2 propositions; 3 open-ended questions |
|
| Information sources and transparency of QIs and practical issues regarding development |
1 close-ended question; 1 open-ended question |
1 proposition; 1 close-ended question; 6 open-ended questions |
6 propositions; 1 close-ended question; 2 open-ended question |
17 propositions |
| Healthcare quality for people with DS and current use of QIs |
3 close-ended questions; 3 open-ended questions |
15 propositions | ||
| Aim of the study | 1 open-ended question | |||
Abbreviations: DS Down syndrome, QI Quality indicator
Empty fields indicate that the topic was not presented to the participants in the concerning round.
a Participants indicated to what extent they agreed with propositions (1 ‘totally agree’, 2 ‘agree’, 3 ‘neutral’, 4 ‘disagree’, 5 ‘totally disagree’)
b Participants rated items (i.e. healthcare disciplines/services or quality domains) indicating the relevance for the QI-set (1 ‘very important’, 2 ‘important’, 3 ‘neutral’, 4 ‘not that important’, 5 ‘not important at all’)