Dunja Dreesens

51 Results We describe briefly the main results of the survey and Delphi-process before we present the process and the results in more detail. The survey and Delphi achieved a reduction of the number of tool types: from 34 to 13 tool types. For five of these 13 tool types consensus was reached on the definitions, and for nine of the 13 selected tool types there was consensus on the importance of these tools concerning knowledge translation and supporting (shared) decision-making (Table 4). Survey and participants Fifty-seven experts participated in our study (Table 1), 13 (19%) declined or did not respond to the invitation. From the 57 participants, 82% (n=47) responded to the survey, of which 44 (77%) completed the entire survey. Table 1: Background of survey participants BACKGROUND* OF PARTICIPANT (more than one option could apply) NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS Employed by research/knowledge institute (not being a university) 21 Tool developer and/or implementer 12 Healthcare professional a 10 Employed by healthcare professional association/society 10 Professor/lecturer at (applied sciences) university 10 Policy advisor 9 Patient (representative) 6 Employed by industry / commercial party 2 Other b 4 Legend table 1 * The participants could choose to indicate more than one background, so the total of the background exceeds the number of participants a Healthcare professionals could choose from: long term care, curative care, public health, primary and secondary care b Others were: experienced clinical practice guideline developer, tool user/patient coach, methodologist and retired healthcare professional in secondary care The results of the survey are presented in table 2 and figure 2. Chapter 3