72 Chapter 3 of the panel had to score the health outcome with a five. The second round therefore consisted primarily of health outcomes on which no consensus was reached. In this second round, participants were again asked to motivate their decisions, to provide recommendations on the definitions and to add any missing health outcomes that they deemed important. In the third and final round, health outcomes on which consensus on importance was achieved during the first or second round, and on which no consensus was achieved in the second round were presented to the participants for rating. In this final round, participants were not able to provide recommendations for the definition or add health outcomes. Statistical analysis Descriptive statistics were used to describe both panels’ demographics and to determine which health outcome were selected for the next round. The “I do not know” option was coded as missing. Missing data were excluded from the analysis per health outcome. Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical language. RESULTS Delphi panel The Delphi rounds were conducted between February 1st 2021 and February 28th 2022. During the first Delphi round, the Dutch Hemophilia Physicians Society, the Dutch Hemophilia Nurses Society, the Dutch Hemophilia Patient Society, 17 healthcare professionals and 256 caregivers of patients received an invitation to participate in this study. The informed consent form was signed by 49 participants. Forty-two participants, consisting of 19 healthcare professionals (45%), 13 patients (31%) and 10 caregivers (24%), participated in the first Delphi round (Table 1 and 2). Most of the participants were female (n=33) and the median age was 41 years (IQR 35 – 48). The response rate in round three was 66,6% (n=32).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw