Department of Language, Literature & Communication, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Pediatrics and Neonatology, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA.
Patient Educ Couns. 2023 Jul;112:107715. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107715. Epub 2023 Mar 25.
To develop valid and realistic manipulations for video-vignette research using expert opinion rounds, in preparation of an experimental study on clinicians' (un)reasonable argumentative support for treatment decisions in neonatal care.
In three rounds, N = 37 participants (parents/clinicians/researchers) provided feedback on four video-vignette scripts and completed listing, ranking, and rating exercises to determine which (un)reasonable arguments clinicians may provide to support treatment decisions.
Round 1: participants deemed the scripts realistic. They judged that, on average, clinicians should provide two arguments for a treatment decision. They listed 13-20 reasonable arguments, depending on the script. Round 2: participants ranked the two most salient, reasonable arguments per script. Round 3: participants rated the most plausible, unreasonable arguments from a predefined list. These results guided the design of 12 experimental conditions.
Expert opinion rounds are an effective method to develop video-vignettes that are theoretically sound and ecologically realistic and offer a powerful means to include stakeholders in experimental research design. Our study yielded some preliminary insights into what are considered prevalent (un)reasonable arguments for clinicians' treatment plans.
We provide hands-on guidelines on involving stakeholders in the design of video-vignette experiments and the development of video-based health communication interventions - both for research and practice.
通过专家意见征询会制定有效的、现实的视频短片研究操作方法，为新生儿护理中临床医生（不）合理论证治疗决策的实验研究做准备。
在三轮中，N=37 名参与者（父母/临床医生/研究人员）对四个视频短片脚本提供反馈，并完成列举、排序和评分练习，以确定临床医生可能提供哪些（不）合理的论据来支持治疗决策。
第一轮：参与者认为脚本具有现实性。他们判断，平均而言，临床医生应为治疗决策提供两个论据。他们根据脚本列举了 13-20 个合理的论据。第二轮：参与者对每个脚本的两个最突出、合理的论据进行了排序。第三轮：参与者从预定义的列表中对最合理的不合理论据进行了评分。这些结果指导了 12 个实验条件的设计。
专家意见征询会是一种有效的方法，可以制定出理论上合理、生态现实的视频短片，并为实验研究设计纳入利益相关者提供有力手段。我们的研究初步探讨了临床医生治疗计划中被认为普遍存在的（不）合理论据。
我们为利益相关者参与视频短片实验设计和基于视频的健康传播干预措施的制定提供了实践指导——无论是用于研究还是实践。
