SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Delphi”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 559 records · Page 31Linked to original sources

PubMed1982

A method of estimating nursing workload.

A real-time nursing computer system operational on six medical wards allows the automatic data capture of all nursing procedures carried out for all patients. Each nursing procedure has been graded by an experienced nurse on a 5-point scale (Ninewells Index I), with grade 5 representing the greatest workload. A Delphi type survey was carried out by a questionnaire involving 115 medical charge nurses in Scotland who graded the same procedures on a 5-point scale (Delphi Index I). Good agreement with the two indices was found. The Delphi Index I was transferred from the original scale to an interval scale (Delphi Index II) to facilitate statistical handling of data and conversion to timings. The conversion of Delphi Index II to timings (Ninewells Index II) was achieved by using data from three extensive work studies. It is suggested that Ninewells Index II is a practical problem of staff allocation in medical wards.

Abstracting and Indexing↗

PubMed2002

Priorities for nursing research in Korea.

PURPOSE: To identify priorities for nursing research in Korea. METHODS: A national sample of nurses in academic and clinical settings, representing varied clinical specialties, participated in two rounds of a Delphi survey. Participants listed five most important nursing research problems rated on three dimensions: the degree of nurses' lead role, contribution to nursing profession, and nurses' contribution to health and welfare of patients and clients. A total of 29 research areas were derived from 1,013 research problems identified from the Delphi surveys, and 26 expert panel members who participated in a 1-day workshop to determine the priority of these areas. Key words of 706 research articles published in the major nursing research journals in Korea were analyzed to identify priorities. RESULTS: In the two rounds of Delphi surveys 347 of 1,047 nurses participated (31%-33% response rates respectively). To three research areas common to both Delphi survey and literature analysis were: clinical nursing practice, nursing education, and nursing research. Cultural nursing was rated the lowest in the Delphi survey but was rated third by the expert panel members. CONCLUSIONS: In the clinical practice area, research on the advanced practice nursing system was the first priority research problem followed by development of nursing interventions, clinical competency, quality and effectiveness of nursing care, and standardized nursing tasks. Research on home health care, nursing education, utilization of nursing research, and geriatric nursing were other areas of priority. Nurses around the world are encouraged to develop collaborative research projects based on common priority areas.

Delphi Technique↗

PubMed2006

Protocol of the COSMIN study: COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments.

BACKGROUND: Choosing an adequate measurement instrument depends on the proposed use of the instrument, the concept to be measured, the measurement properties (e.g. internal consistency, reproducibility, content and construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability), the requirements, the burden for subjects, and costs of the available instruments. As far as measurement properties are concerned, there are no sufficiently specific standards for the evaluation of measurement properties of instruments to measure health status, and also no explicit criteria for what constitutes good measurement properties. In this paper we describe the protocol for the COSMIN study, the objective of which is to develop a checklist that contains COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments, including explicit criteria for satisfying these standards. We will focus on evaluative health related patient-reported outcomes (HR-PROs), i.e. patient-reported health measurement instruments used in a longitudinal design as an outcome measure, excluding health care related PROs, such as satisfaction with care or adherence. The COSMIN standards will be made available in the form of an easily applicable checklist. METHOD: An international Delphi study will be performed to reach consensus on which and how measurement properties should be assessed, and on criteria for good measurement properties. Two sources of input will be used for the Delphi study: (1) a systematic review of properties, standards and criteria of measurement properties found in systematic reviews of measurement instruments, and (2) an additional literature search of methodological articles presenting a comprehensive checklist of standards and criteria. The Delphi study will consist of four (written) Delphi rounds, with approximately 30 expert panel members with different backgrounds in clinical medicine, biostatistics, psychology, and epidemiology. The final checklist will subsequently be field-tested by assessing the inter-rater reproducibility of the checklist. DISCUSSION: Since the study will mainly be anonymous, problems that are commonly encountered in face-to-face group meetings, such as the dominance of certain persons in the communication process, will be avoided. By performing a Delphi study and involving many experts, the likelihood that the checklist will have sufficient credibility to be accepted and implemented will increase.

Clinical Protocols↗

PubMed2026

Development of a core descriptor set for studies assessing interventions for diabetes-related foot ulceration.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Foot ulceration is a common complication of diabetes and is associated with high mortality and costs. The quality of evidence to inform clinical practice is limited, partly because clinical studies do not consistently report baseline participant characteristics. This study aimed to develop a core descriptor set (CDS), a minimum set of descriptors to be measured in all studies evaluating interventions for people with diabetes-related foot ulceration. METHODS: A longlist of descriptors was generated through a systematic review of studies assessing interventions for diabetes-related foot ulcers, pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019128250). The identified descriptors were then ranked based on perceived importance by healthcare professionals from different fields and geographical locations using a nine-point Likert scale in the first round of a Delphi survey. Using standardised criteria, descriptors without consensus were re-ranked in round two. Critical descriptors and those without consensus after the Delphi process were discussed in the consensus meeting to finalise the CDS. RESULTS: The systematic review yielded 95 candidate descriptors. The two Delphi rounds were completed by 102 and 69 healthcare professionals, respectively. The Delphi process identified 34 critically important descriptors and 13 descriptors without consensus, which were discussed in the consensus meeting. The ratified CDS included 28 descriptors across nine domains: demographic variables; individual factors; ulcer characteristics; limb characteristics; ongoing medical interventions; previous surgical interventions; medication history; biochemical measurements; and quality of life/function/symptoms. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This CDS reflects characteristics important to health professionals and researchers when reporting clinical studies on diabetes-related foot ulceration. Its use will aid the reporting of future studies.

Humans↗

PubMed1978

A quality of care evaluation measure for emergency medical service systems.

This paper presents the development and validation of an emergency medical service (EMS) systems quality of care evaluation measure. The System Input Severity Measure consists of a set of single and multiple injury survival rates that would be expected to occur in an EMS system classified as providing "baseline" advanced life support services. These expected survival rates were developed by a nationwide panel of emergency medicine experts through the use of the Delphi group opinion surveying technique. Validation of the System Input Severity Measure was a twofold process. First, reliability of the results of the Delphi surveying process was validated by comparing the resultant expected survival rates with Illinois Trauma Registry data. Second, the applicability of the measure was validated using data collected in EMS systems generally recognized to be providing exceptional (either superior or inferior) emergency patient care. It was recognized that the development of a comprehensive, large-scale System Input Severity Measure through the use of the Delphi technique alone is impractical. Consequently, a functional relationship between single and multiple injury survival rates was also developed. It appeared that when employed in conjunction with data developed from the Delphi technique, such an approach would make practicable the development of a comprehensive System Input Severity Measure.

Delphi Technique↗

PubMed1995

Criteria for selection of a payment method for inpatient medical rehabilitation.

This article presents the results of a 3-stage Delphi survey designed to identify the policy criteria that should govern the evaluation of alternative payment methods and guide the selection of a payment method for inpatient medical rehabilitation. The Delphi survey (n = 85) included four groups of participants: consumers (n = 8), providers (n = 35), payers (n = 15), and health services researchers (n = 27). The Delphi survey uncovered 16 evaluation criteria. Delphi participants evaluated each criterion on a 10-point scale (1 = not important; 10 = greatest importance). Respondents value maximize patient/family outcome, maximize access, and maximize efficiency as the three most important criteria. Respondents report that minimize financial risk is the least important criterion. The results from both stage 2 and stage 3 (response rate = 85%) indicate a high level of consensus across the four respondent groups.

Delphi Technique↗

PubMed1988

How much day surgery? Delphic predictions.

A list was compiled of 83 of the commonest operations, which according to published reports may be performed on day patients but which in our district were usually performed on inpatients. The results of a national Delphi study among anaesthetists and general surgeons who were known to be in favour of day surgery produced estimates of the probable rates of day surgery for each of those operations under ideal conditions. Comparison of these figures with those from a Delphi study carried out in one district and with figures for day surgery carried out in that district and with waiting list figures enabled two health districts to focus their efforts to increase day surgery. The figures from the national Delphi study could be applied in other districts if the following are taken into account: Hospital Activity Analysis data must be validated; though there was consensus among the national Delphi consultants, personal clinical opinions varied; the case load may grow as waiting lists decrease.

Age Factors↗

PubMed2006

Multidisciplinary consensus on the terminology and classification of complaints of the arm, neck and/or shoulder.

BACKGROUND: There is no universally accepted way of labelling or defining upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders. A variety of names are used and many different classification systems have been introduced. OBJECTIVE: To agree on an "unambiguous language" concerning the terminology and classification that can be used by all relevant medical and paramedical disciplines in the Netherlands. METHODS: A Delphi consensus strategy was initiated. The outcomes of a multidisciplinary conference were used as a starting point. In total, 47 experts in the field of upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders were delegated by 11 medical and paramedical professional associations to form the expert panel for the Delphi consensus strategy. Each Delphi round consisted of a questionnaire, an analysis and a feedback report. RESULTS: After three Delphi rounds, consensus was achieved. The experts reported the consensus in a model. This so-called CANS model describes the term, definition and classification of complaints of arm, neck and/or shoulder (CANS) and helps professionals to classify patients unambiguously. CANS is defined as "musculoskeletal complaints of arm, neck and/or shoulder not caused by acute trauma or by any systemic disease". The experts classified 23 disorders as specific CANS, because they were judged as diagnosable disorders. All other complaints were called non-specific CANS. In addition, the experts defined "alert symptoms" on the top of the model. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the CANS model can increase accurate and meaningful communication among healthcare workers, and may also have a positive influence on the quality of scientific research, by enabling comparison of data of different studies.

Arm↗

PubMed2005

Performance measures for early psychosis treatment services.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the feasibility of identifying performance measures for early psychosis treatment services and obtaining consensus for these measures. The requirements of the study were that the processes used to identify measures and gain consensus should be comprehensive, be reproducible, and reflect the perspective of multiple stakeholders in Canada. METHODS: The study was conducted in two stages. First a literature review was performed to gather articles published from 1995 to July 2002, and experts were consulted to determine performance measures. Second, a consensus-building technique, the Delphi process, was used with nominated participants from seven groups of stakeholders. Twenty stakeholders participated in three rounds of questionnaires. The degree of consensus achieved by the Delphi process was assessed by calculating the semi-interquartile range for each measure. RESULTS: Seventy-three performance measures were identified from the literature review and consultation with experts. The Delphi method reduced the list to 24 measures rated as essential. This approach proved to be both feasible and cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the diversity in the backgrounds of the stakeholder groups, the Delphi technique was effective in moving participants' ratings toward consensus through successive questionnaire rounds. The resulting measures reflected the interests of all stakeholders.

Canada↗

PubMed1993

Preventive therapy for the patient with both universal indication and contraindication for isoniazid.

BACKGROUND: The delphi method of decision making was used to address an unusual clinical case in which various aspects of the case required opposing management strategies. METHODS: A panel of 30 pulmonary experts was surveyed repeatedly until a convergence of treatment approaches was reached for a patient who was considered to have both a universal indication for and a universal contraindication against prevention therapy. Participants were asked to evaluate the appropriateness of proposed treatments on a scale from 1 to 9, with 1 being extremely inappropriate, 5 being equivocal, and 9 being extremely appropriate. The delphi survey data responses were compared using measures of central tendency (ie, the mean and median) and measures of variability (ie, the standard deviation and interquartile range). RESULTS: Although no treatment was wholeheartedly supported by the experts, analysis of the three-round delphi survey responses resulted in two possible treatments: rifampin, 600 mg daily, for four months, or no treatment with close observation. Interestingly, the experts working in a non-university setting favored the rifampin treatment, and those working in a university setting favored no treatment with close observation. CONCLUSIONS: The delphi method has the potential to be used for clinical decision making.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) project is to develop a criteria list for assessment of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in systematic reviews. The criteria list resulting from this CHEC project should be regarded as a minimum standard. METHODS: The criteria list has been developed using a Delphi method. Three Delphi rounds were needed to reach consensus. Twenty-three international experts participated in the Delphi panel. RESULTS: The Delphi panel achieved consensus over a generic core set of items for the quality assessment of economic evaluations. Each item of the CHEC-list was formulated as a question that can be answered by yes or no. To standardize the interpretation of the list and facilitate its use, the project team also provided an operationalization of the criteria list items. CONCLUSIONS: There was consensus among a group of international experts regarding a core set of items that can be used to assess the quality of economic evaluations in systematic reviews. Using this checklist will make future systematic reviews of economic evaluations more transparent, informative, and comparable. Consequently, researchers and policy-makers might use these systematic reviews more easily. The CHEC-list can be downloaded freely from http://www.beoz.unimaas.nl/chec/.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

PubMed1990

Projections of HIV infections and AIDS cases to the year 2000.

After the recognition of AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) in the early 1980s, uncertainty about the present and future dimensions of HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) infection led to the development of many models to estimate current and future numbers of HIV infections and AIDS cases. The Global Programme on AIDS (GPA) of the World Health Organization (WHO) has developed an AIDS projection model which relies on available HIV seroprevalence data and on the annual rate of progression from HIV infection to AIDS for use in areas where reporting of AIDS cases is incomplete, and where scant data are available to quantify biological and human behavioural variables. Virtually all models, including the WHO model, have projected large increases in the number of AIDS cases by the early 1990s. Such short-term projections are considered relatively reliable since most of the new AIDS cases will develop in persons already infected with HIV. Longer-term prediction (10 years or longer) is less reliable because HIV prevalence and future trends are determined by many variables, most of which are still not well understood. WHO has now applied the Delphi method to project HIV prevalence from the year 1988 to mid-2000. This method attempts to improve the quality of the judgements and estimates for relatively uncertain issues by the systematic use of knowledgeable "experts". The mean value of the Delphi projections for HIV prevalence in the year 2000 is between 3 and 4 times the 1988 base estimate of 5.1 million; these projections have been used to obtain annual estimates of adult AIDS cases up to the year 2000. Coordinated HIV/AIDS prevention and control programmes are considered by the Delphi participants to be potentially capable of preventing almost half of the new HIV infections that would otherwise occur between 1988 and the year 2000. However, more than half of the approximately 5 million AIDS cases which are projected for the next decade will occur despite the most rigorous and effective HIV/AIDS prevention efforts since these AIDS cases will develop in persons whose HIV infection was acquired prior to 1989. The Delphi projections of HIV infection and AIDS cases derived from the WHO projection model need to be periodically reviewed and modified as additional data become available. These projections should be viewed as the first of many attempts to develop estimates for planning strategies to combat the HIV/AIDS pandemic in the 1990s.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Attributes of trainers for postgraduate training in general surgery--a national consensus.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to obtain consensus amongst consultant surgeons on the attributes of a good surgical trainer that can be used to inform continuing professional development programmes for trainers. METHODS: good trainer attributes were generated from an intensive qualitative study using a participative inquiry process with consultant general surgeons and specialist registrars in the Tayside region. These good trainer attributes were then used as the basis of a modified Delphi study; the early rounds of the Delphi simultaneously sought participants' views concerning stated attributes and sought to generate new attributes. A final Delphi questionnaire was sent to all 180 consultant general surgeons in Scotland to identify consensus. RESULTS: The first two rounds of the Delphi process produced 45 attributes covering seven themes: interest in training, trainer as a team member, communication, receptiveness to trainee needs, trainer as a role model, reflection on practice and clinical and operative competence. The final survey identified significant consensus among surgeons. Clinical and operative competence achieved the highest consensus with 89.2% of surgeons believing it to be an essential attribute. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that there is consensus on the seven themes identified as essential for a trainer in general surgery. The recognition of the importance by trainers of non-surgical trainer attributes in the changed training structure is encouraging. Surgeons' level of awareness of their roles as a trainer will help inform the level and direction of trainer training and support required as part of a flexible and continuing developmental process.

Education, Medical, Graduate↗

PubMed2003

The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: In the era of evidence based medicine, with systematic reviews as its cornerstone, adequate quality assessment tools should be available. There is currently a lack of a systematically developed and evaluated tool for the assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. The aim of this project was to combine empirical evidence and expert opinion in a formal consensus method to develop a tool to be used in systematic reviews to assess the quality of primary studies of diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: We conducted a Delphi procedure to develop the quality assessment tool by refining an initial list of items. Members of the Delphi panel were experts in the area of diagnostic research. The results of three previously conducted reviews of the diagnostic literature were used to generate a list of potential items for inclusion in the tool and to provide an evidence base upon which to develop the tool. RESULTS: A total of nine experts in the field of diagnostics took part in the Delphi procedure. The Delphi procedure consisted of four rounds, after which agreement was reached on the items to be included in the tool which we have called QUADAS. The initial list of 28 items was reduced to fourteen items in the final tool. Items included covered patient spectrum, reference standard, disease progression bias, verification bias, review bias, clinical review bias, incorporation bias, test execution, study withdrawals, and indeterminate results. The QUADAS tool is presented together with guidelines for scoring each of the items included in the tool. CONCLUSIONS: This project has produced an evidence based quality assessment tool to be used in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. Further work to determine the usability and validity of the tool continues.

Bias↗

PubMed2005

Quality assurance instrument focusing on patient counseling.

BACKGROUND: Patient counseling is a professional service provided by community pharmacists. To assess the quality of these services, specific quality assurance instruments are needed. OBJECTIVE: To develop a validated, easy-to-use patient counseling quality assurance instrument for community pharmacists. The development process was part of a national project to enhance patient counseling in community pharmacies (TIPPA 2000-2003). METHODS: A modified Delphi method was used with 2 expert panels: Panel 1, consisting of experienced pharmacy practitioners (n = 10), and Panel 2, consisting of academic and professional experts (n = 10). The final consensus was assessed by a Delphi questionnaire round involving both panels, the employers of Panel 1 members (n = 5), and the members of the executive board of the TIPPA project (n = 10), comprising 35 people (response rate 74%; n = 26). RESULTS: The first Delphi round yielded a high consensus, with the level of agreement varying between 69% and 100%. All but one item met the predefined criteria for approval. A total of 16 indicators were identified in 3 quality dimensions: patient (4 indicators), process (6), and learning and innovations (6). Strategy and vision of the pharmacy in patient counseling formed the core of the instrument. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Delphi method proved to be applicable in the development process of an instrument assessing patient counseling services. The instrument comprehensively takes into account factors related to quality assurance of counseling practices.

Finland↗

PubMed1999

Positron emission tomography: establishing priorities for health technology assessment.

BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) is an expensive diagnostic imaging technology. Despite the long history of PET development, the costs and effectiveness of its use in routine clinical practice remain unknown. Against this background of uncertainty regarding the clinical role of PET, the UK Standing Group on Health Technology requested a review of its current and potential role which would enable research priorities in this area to be established. OBJECTIVES: This 3-month project had two explicit objectives: (1) to review the state of knowledge regarding the clinical applications of PET; (2) to determine the key health technology assessment (HTA) research questions relating to the use of PET in the UK. METHODS: A literature review to ascertain the state of knowledge regarding the clinical applications of PET and a three-round Delphi study to inform the key HTA research questions relating to the use of PET in the UK were undertaken. The results of an earlier systematic review, published by the Veteran's Health Administration (VHA) in the USA in 1996, were used as the starting point for the literature review. The VHA review was updated and extended by means of MEDLINE and Cochrane Library database searches. Participants in the Delphi study were selected by discussion with five individuals in the UK with an interest in, and awareness of, developments in PET. As a result of their suggestions, 43 individuals were initially invited to participate, of whom two did not feel appropriately qualified. Questionnaires were sent by facsimile to all invited participants, who were asked to return the completed forms by facsimile within a week. The content and structure of the Delphi study was informed by the results of the literature review. The responses and comments of the participants were a major source of information for this report. RESULTS: Clinical applications for PET have been advocated in three broad disease groups: oncology, cardiology and neuropsychiatric disorders. There are currently four PET modalities that need to be considered when assessing its potential clinical role in the UK: full ring PET scanners operating in two or three dimensions (available at five sites); partial ring rotating PET scanners (one currently operating in the UK); coincidence imaging with modified gamma camera technology; and high-energy collimator imaging of 511 keV photons with modified gamma camera technology. There is a paucity of available evidence relating to the cost-effectiveness of the various PET modalities in all of the clinical indications for which the technology is currently being advocated. In addition, many existing reports on the diagnostic accuracy of PET are limited because they are liable to bias and often relate only to very small patient numbers. The results of the Delphi study indicated that the four most important research priorities for the NHS, in descending order of their importance, are: (1) the relative cost-effectiveness of (a) full ring PET, (b) gamma camera PET using coincidence imaging and (c) existing diagnostic strategies to determine staging prior to operative intervention for lung cancer; (2) partial ring PET compared with full ring PET in oncology (3) the relative cost-effectiveness of (a) full ring PET, (b) gamma camera PET using coincidence imaging and (c) existing diagnostic strategies to stage and monitor treatment response in breast cancer; (4) the relative cost-effectiveness of (a) gamma camera PET using coincidence imaging and (b) 511 keV collimated positron imaging for assessing myocardial viability when selecting patients for revascularisation surgery. Vignettes describing each of the research priorities are provided in the main report. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this project, which was undertaken rapidly in order to inform HTA research prioritization in the UK, provide a contemporary overview of the potential clinical role for PET in the NHS. Evidence is needed that using PET as a diagnostic

Female↗

PubMed2000

Orthopaedics, ethics, and industry. Appropriateness of gifts, grants, and awards.

At the Academic Orthopaedic Society meeting in San Francisco on November 8 and 9, 1996, the membership addressed the issue of ethics and industry in an academic setting. Using a Delphi panel technique, they arrived at a definition of conflict of interest, and 41 separate points of acceptable and unacceptable behavior related to gifts, research awards, and funding of various activities. The Academic Orthopaedic Society Delphi Committee also mailed 191 questionnaires (157 department chairpersons and 34 program directors) to 157 training programs. The respective department chairpersons and program directors were asked to copy and distribute the questionnaires to staff (faculty) and house officers (residents and fellows) to complete anonymously and return them for collation. Ninety-one programs (58%) responded. Three hundred and fifty-two questionnaires were returned (237 from staff, 115 from house officers), each of which expressed agreement or lack of agreement with the Delphi panel report using a Likert scale technique. With only modest (and usually predictable) disagreement on certain items, the final statements by the Delphi panel were supported strongly by the survive results. The Academic Orthopaedic Society believes that the major points arrived at by the panelists should serve as the basis for ethical guidelines in the relation between academic orthopaedic institutions and industry.

Awards and Prizes↗

PubMed2006

Assessing the institutional effectiveness of state environmental agencies in Turkey.

Improving the performance of the state environmental agencies (SEAs) necessitates an effective institutionalization of governmental environmental management functions. There are examples of successful and unsuccessful SEAs in several parts of the world. Analysis and assessment of these cases can deliver useful insights for institution builders. The objective of this article is the assessment of the institutional effectiveness of the SEAs in Turkey through the perceptions of the experts using the Delphi Technique. In this regard, a checklist is developed including 16 criteria and 123 subcriteria to measure the institutional effectiveness of the SEAs. Twenty-eight national and international experts have formed a Delphi panel and evaluated the national and local conditions. Results, based on the perceptions of the experts, indicate that the overall effectiveness of the SEAs is far less than satisfactory. Negative consensus has been reached over the effectiveness of 13 of the 16 criteria and 95 of the 123 subcriteria; however, no consensus has been achieved over the remainder of the parameters. The survey has also proven that the Delphi Technique can be effectively used for that purpose. Utilization of the checklist method is also useful in diagnosing the problematic components of the SEAs. It is recommended that this approach be used in similar cases elsewhere.

Delphi Technique↗