Browsing by Author "Grant, Sean Patrick"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Developing a medication adherence technologies repository: proposed structure and protocol for an online real-time Delphi study
    (BMJ, 2022-04-22) Nabergoj Makovec, Urska; Goetzinger, Catherine; Ribaut, Janette; Barnestein-Fonseca, Pilar; Haupenthal, Frederik; Herdeiro, Maria Teresa; Grant, Sean Patrick; Jácome, Cristina; Roque, Fatima; Smits, Dins; Tadic, Ivana; Dima, Alexandra L.; European Network to Advance Best practices and technoLogy on medication adherencE (ENABLE); Epidemiology, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    Introduction: An online interactive repository of available medication adherence technologies may facilitate their selection and adoption by different stakeholders. Developing a repository is among the main objectives of the European Network to Advance Best practices and technoLogy on medication adherencE (ENABLE) COST Action (CA19132). However, meeting the needs of diverse stakeholders requires careful consideration of the repository structure. Methods and analysis: A real-time online Delphi study by stakeholders from 39 countries with research, practice, policy, patient representation and technology development backgrounds will be conducted. Eleven ENABLE members from 9 European countries formed an interdisciplinary steering committee to develop the repository structure, prepare study protocol and perform it. Definitions of medication adherence technologies and their attributes were developed iteratively through literature review, discussions within the steering committee and ENABLE Action members, following ontology development recommendations. Three domains (product and provider information (D1), medication adherence descriptors (D2) and evaluation and implementation (D3)) branching in 13 attribute groups are proposed: product and provider information, target use scenarios, target health conditions, medication regimen, medication adherence management components, monitoring/measurement methods and targets, intervention modes of delivery, target behaviour determinants, behaviour change techniques, intervention providers, intervention settings, quality indicators and implementation indicators. Stakeholders will evaluate the proposed definition and attributes' relevance, clarity and completeness and have multiple opportunities to reconsider their evaluations based on aggregated feedback in real-time. Data collection will stop when the predetermined response rate will be achieved. We will quantify agreement and perform analyses of process indicators on the whole sample and per stakeholder group. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for the COST ENABLE activities was granted by the Malaga Regional Research Ethics Committee. The Delphi protocol was considered compliant regarding data protection and security by the Data Protection Officer from University of Basel. Findings from the Delphi study will form the basis for the ENABLE repository structure and related activities.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Establishing open science research priorities in health psychology: a research prioritisation Delphi exercise
    (Taylor & Francis, 2022-10) Norris, Emma; Prescott, Amy; Noone, Chris; Green, James A.; Reynolds, James; Grant, Sean Patrick; Toomey, Elaine; Epidemiology, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    Objective Research on Open Science practices in Health Psychology is lacking. This meta-research study aimed to identify research question priorities and obtain consensus on the Top 5 prioritised research questions for Open Science in Health Psychology. Methods and measures An international Delphi consensus study was conducted. Twenty-three experts in Open Science and Health Psychology within the European Health Psychology Society (EHPS) suggested research question priorities to create a ‘long-list’ of items (Phase 1). Forty-three EHPS members rated the importance of these items, ranked their top five and suggested their own additional items (Phase 2). Twenty-four EHPS members received feedback on Phase 2 responses and then re-rated and re-ranked their top five research questions (Phase 3). Results The top five ranked research question priorities were: 1. ‘To what extent are Open Science behaviours currently practised in Health Psychology?’, 2. ‘How can we maximise the usefulness of Open Data and Open Code resources?’, 3. ‘How can Open Data be increased within Health Psychology?’, 4. ‘What interventions are effective for increasing the adoption of Open Science in Health Psychology?’ and 5. ‘How can we increase free Open Access publishing in Health Psychology?’. Conclusion Funding and resources should prioritise the research questions identified here.