| The consensus study, steps . | Objective . | Panellists, n (%) . |
|---|---|---|
| Meeting 1 | Introduction to the methodological framework for developing quality measures | 9 (81.8) |
| Online: expert opinions | The clinical expert panel reviewed the list of recommendations and was allowed to supply to the list if clinical important areas were missing (online, anonymous) | 10 (90.0) |
| Online: Survey 1 | Rating the full list of recommendations (online, anonymous) | 11 (100) |
| Meeting 2 | Evaluating consensus: quality measuresa | 10 (90.9) |
| At-meeting Survey 2 | At-meeting mail voting on collectively recommending the 13 prioritised quality measures (anonymous)a | 9 (81.8) |
| Meeting 3 | Closing remarks from the expert panel members on the quality measures and the future process of practice testing and implementation | 9 (81.8) |
| The consensus study, steps . | Objective . | Panellists, n (%) . |
|---|---|---|
| Meeting 1 | Introduction to the methodological framework for developing quality measures | 9 (81.8) |
| Online: expert opinions | The clinical expert panel reviewed the list of recommendations and was allowed to supply to the list if clinical important areas were missing (online, anonymous) | 10 (90.0) |
| Online: Survey 1 | Rating the full list of recommendations (online, anonymous) | 11 (100) |
| Meeting 2 | Evaluating consensus: quality measuresa | 10 (90.9) |
| At-meeting Survey 2 | At-meeting mail voting on collectively recommending the 13 prioritised quality measures (anonymous)a | 9 (81.8) |
| Meeting 3 | Closing remarks from the expert panel members on the quality measures and the future process of practice testing and implementation | 9 (81.8) |
One panel member was unable to participate in the second part of meeting 2 and the at-meeting survey.
| The consensus study, steps . | Objective . | Panellists, n (%) . |
|---|---|---|
| Meeting 1 | Introduction to the methodological framework for developing quality measures | 9 (81.8) |
| Online: expert opinions | The clinical expert panel reviewed the list of recommendations and was allowed to supply to the list if clinical important areas were missing (online, anonymous) | 10 (90.0) |
| Online: Survey 1 | Rating the full list of recommendations (online, anonymous) | 11 (100) |
| Meeting 2 | Evaluating consensus: quality measuresa | 10 (90.9) |
| At-meeting Survey 2 | At-meeting mail voting on collectively recommending the 13 prioritised quality measures (anonymous)a | 9 (81.8) |
| Meeting 3 | Closing remarks from the expert panel members on the quality measures and the future process of practice testing and implementation | 9 (81.8) |
| The consensus study, steps . | Objective . | Panellists, n (%) . |
|---|---|---|
| Meeting 1 | Introduction to the methodological framework for developing quality measures | 9 (81.8) |
| Online: expert opinions | The clinical expert panel reviewed the list of recommendations and was allowed to supply to the list if clinical important areas were missing (online, anonymous) | 10 (90.0) |
| Online: Survey 1 | Rating the full list of recommendations (online, anonymous) | 11 (100) |
| Meeting 2 | Evaluating consensus: quality measuresa | 10 (90.9) |
| At-meeting Survey 2 | At-meeting mail voting on collectively recommending the 13 prioritised quality measures (anonymous)a | 9 (81.8) |
| Meeting 3 | Closing remarks from the expert panel members on the quality measures and the future process of practice testing and implementation | 9 (81.8) |
One panel member was unable to participate in the second part of meeting 2 and the at-meeting survey.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
