Table 2.

Results from Delphi scoring steps

^*Competency statement was added in step 3—revision and addition of the list

^bBolded statements compose the final list of competencies

^cStep 8 (second round of Delphi scoring) had three fewer participants compared to Step 5 (first round of scoring). All three participants who left were male, two of whom were government human resource planner, and one was an academic. Note: participants are the same people in each step, as no new participants were added between steps

^dConsensus was identified using percent agreement criterion. A statement was deemed to have reached consensus when over 80% of the participants ranked it as “very important = 4” or “absolutely essential = 5” in the second Delphi scoring step. The statements where no consensus was reached have been identified in the table above with a red text in the corresponding p-value

^eStability between Delphi scoring steps was assessed using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test. We considered a statement to be stable if there was no statistically significant change in responses between the scoring steps for each statement (p ≥ 0.05). Statements where stability was not reached (p < 0.05) have also been identified in red text in the table above. Given the importance of these competencies, we left them on our final list. We recognize that subsequent Delphi steps to generate stability in these statements would have been ideal