To select main criteria expert's opinions were taken by Delphi decision-making framework.
This series, which used different inclusion criteria (expert pathology referral), confirms what was found in our series.
A Delphi survey was utilized and included the following criteria: expert panelists, three iterative rounds, qualitative and quantitative analysis, and building consensus.
For the most subjective criteria, expert opinion is supplemented with the views of individuals involved with newborn screening programs and child health professionals and families.
Although the mammoth and the passenger pigeon might pass McCauley's first criterion, experts are skeptical about whether they're truly the best animals to focus on.
The reference diagnosis of WIPO was established on other criteria by experts blind for LUS.
More details about the criteria for experts and novices can be found in Auerbach et al. (2018).
Specified inclusion criteria for experts and defining our method for analysis strengthened the Delphi approach.
With this comprehensive set of criteria, relevant experts can assess the performance of health interventions, and results are input for informed and transparent healthcare decisions.
Following the application of inclusion criteria, academic experts working in the field of public health and palliative care were contacted and asked about any additional relevant published work which they knew about.
