> A statement on sampling criteria also failed to achieve consensus (67% agreement— table 3, Statement 20).
The study's objective, subject's right to refuse consent, and assurance that patients would not be disadvantaged by refusing consent for publication of their information were stated in only a few consent forms, and none of them included a statement on inclusion criteria, potential benefits for subjects, or the voluntary nature of participation.
Although 103 participants (74.1%) responded to the survey, only 74 (53.2%) answered one or more of the 27 round 1 questionnaire statements on diagnostic criteria.
In rounds 2 and 3, experts rated statements on quality criteria and competencies on a 1 to 7 Likert-scale.
The questionnaire listed 90 statements on quality criteria and competencies, introduced through exemplary cases from maternity care practice.
We used this information to develop a questionnaire with statements on quality criteria and competencies for SDM that was then distributed in Round 2 of the Delphi.
Emerging and recurring themes were discussed with all authors and transcribed into statements on quality criteria for the SDM process and competencies needed for SDM in maternity care.
The exclusion of individuals who responded to the statements on diagnostic criteria for the first time in the round 2 questionnaire did not influence the achievement of consensus agreement for any statement or alter the conclusions drawn from this analysis (data not shown).
However, due to the recruitment of panel members based on experience or expertise on screening or diagnosis and the examination of both screening and diagnosis in the questionnaire, we did not anticipate that all panel members would respond to the statements on diagnostic criteria.
We found that completeness of response to the statements on diagnostic criteria was related to training and experience in FASD diagnosis, and likely reflects the limited familiarity with diagnostic guidelines among Australian health professionals, 13 and the limited diagnostic capacity for FASD in Australia.
Participants who did not complete the round 1 questionnaire were excluded from round 2. Due to the potential for feedback about findings from round 1 to influence participation in round 2, individuals who first responded to the statements on diagnostic criteria in round 2 were excluded from this analysis.
