AzTrials
AzTrials

Consensus DevelopmentNCT05595018

The Opinions of Multiple Stakeholders Towards Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework: Four Studies Using Delphi Techniques

An observational study of Consensus Development, run by The University of Hong Kong at 1 site in Hong Kong.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The 4 studies aim to collect and examine the opinions from multiple stakeholders of gerontechnology product including the demand side, funder, supply side and academia on Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Consensus Development
What is being tested?
End user, Demand side- management and Supply side
How many people
87 participants
Where
1 siteHong Kong
Study dates
21 Oct 2022to 31 Aug 2023
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Study population: Stakeholders of gerontechnology in Hong Kong

Who may be able to join

None listed.

Who cannot join

  • Unable to communicate in Chinese

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Hong Kong1 site
  • The University of Hong Kong

    Hong Kong

Other trials in Hong Kong

About this study

The 4 studies aim to collect and examine the opinions from multiple stakeholders of gerontechnology product including the demand side, funder, supply side and academia on Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework. The Evaluation Framework will describe the essential knowledge to conduct an evaluation study for 10 selected gerontechnology product themes in local service settings. Specifically, we will (1) develop the indicators to determine if a companion robot, which is one of the product themes, is 'good'; (2) describe feasible study designs, implementation strategies and data analyses to generate evidenced-based evaluation results of companion robots; (3) outline strategies to build organizational research capacity to facilitate the evaluation of gerontechnology products.

In the Preparation Stage of all 4 studies, eligible participants will be recruited under purposive sampling and snowball sampling. Literature review, qualitative interviews and reflection on recent experience of evaluating gerontechnology products will be conducted. The opinions collected from the stakeholders will facilitate questionnaire development for the Delphi Stage. In the Delphi Stage of each of the 4 studies, there will be two rounds of quantitative validation of the grouped statements to generate consensus. Based on the opinions with consensus, the evaluation framework will be revised.

Read the detailed description

Study design For research question (1), two studies, i.e. Study A1 and A2, will be conducted. Study A1 will conduct secondary data analyses on qualitative interviews and a two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques with end users. Study A2 will conduct focus groups and a two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques with decision makers. For research question (2), Study B will employ a focus group and a real-time two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques with decision makers. For research question (3), Study C will employ a real-time two-round questionnaire using Delphi techniques study with decision makers.

For all 4 studies, in the first Delphi round, panellists will rate anonymously the agreement of the opinions on a 5-point Likert scale, give reasons for their ratings and suggest revisions. They will then be presented with the overall analyses and their ratings in the first round. In the second Delphi round, they will rate anonymously the agreement of the revisions, and give reasons for their ratings.

Procedures Preparation Stage In Study A1, for qualitative interviews with product users, we will do a secondary data analysis on individual qualitative interviews with 10 end users and 6 demand side - frontline. All of them were recruited from a residential care home and previously participated in an intervention study using companion robot. Their answers to questions related to 'good' companion robots will be analyzed by framework analysis. The analyzed opinions, upon the approval of the investigators, will be listed as the questionnaire items for use in Delphi part. Additional questionnaire items for the Delphi part will be added based on the literature that explored the opinions of the product users towards companion robots. For the Delphi part, 20 - 60 eligible visitors of Gerontech and Innovation Expo, a local exhibition that provides a platform for stakeholders to discuss and collaborate for broader adoption of gerontechnology, will be recruited by convenience sampling at the time of Expo registration. Their voluntary written consent will be sought before they complete the Delphi questionnaire. They will provide their email address and contact number, so that they could be contacted to do second Delphi round.

In Study A2, for focus groups with decision makers, 5 - 20 decision makers who have joined the development, evaluation or procurement process about companion robots will be purposively recruited by investigators of the project through phone calls and emails. In particular, demand side - managerial personnel will be recruited from the organizations that have adopted companion robots in their service units. Academia will be recruited by purposive sampling on the investigators who have publication(s) on gerontechnology in online databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL, EMBASE, and by convenient sampling on the nursing educators in the School of Nursing, the University of Hong Kong (HKU) will be conveniently recruited. Funders to be recruited are the representatives nominated Innovation and Technology Fund (that subsidizes social service units in renting and procuring gerontechnology products including companion robots) and. Supply side who expressed willingness to the Hong Kong Council of Social Service on providing companion robot(s) for trial test will be recruited. Similar to Study A1, their opinions will be analyzed by framework analysis. The analyzed opinions, upon the approval of the investigators, will be listed as the questionnaire items for use in Delphi part. For the Delphi part, 15 - 40 eligible visitors of Gerontech and Innovation Expo will be recruited following the same recruitment mechanism as the Delphi part in Study A1.

In Study B, the same focus groups participants who join the focus groups in Study A2 are simultaneously recruited. Their opinions in the focus groups will be analyzed by framework analysis. The analyzed opinions, upon the approval of the investigators, will be listed as the questionnaire items for use in Delphi part. For real-time Delphi questionnaires, in addition to the above decision makers, snowball sampling will be adopted to recruit the partners of Hong Kong Council of Social Service. These partners agreed to join discussions on gerontechnology, and they are eligible to join the Delphi part no matter they have or do not have experience in the development, evaluation or procurement process about companion robots. In total 8 - 15 panelists will be recruited.

In Study C, the questionnaire used in the Delphi stage will contain a list of strategies in enhancing the organizational research capacity, which are consolidated from literature review and investigators' past experience in doing similar research. In the Delphi Stage, the participants will be recruited in the same way as in Study B. In total 8 - 15 panelists will be recruited.

Delphi Stage For all 4 studies, in the first Delphi round, panellists will rate anonymously the agreement of the opinions on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), explain their ratings of 3 or less and suggest revisions (including additions of new items). Upon the approval of the investigators, items will be revised according to the suggestions. Items in the first Delphi round that reach moderate or low consensus are revised, and rated in the second Delphi round together with the newly suggested items. On the contrary, for items that reach very high consensus or high consensus, if no revisions are suggested, they will not be rated again. Before the second Delphi round, the panellists will be presented with the consensus level analyses, their own ratings in the first round, and proposed revisions based on the comment on the analysis. Items with more than 75% approval of the revised items will be included in the second round Delphi. In this round, more panellists will be recruited to rate anonymously the agreement of the revised items.

For Study A1 and A2, the second Delphi round is expected to take place two weeks after the first Delphi round. For Study B and C that adopt real-time Delphi in a workshop, the investigators will first present the materials consolidated in the Preparation Stage, and panellists will immediately indicate the agreement of the materials in the first Delphi round. This is followed by an open discussion of first round Delphi analysis results among the panellists for around an hour. For diverse opinions on the same issue, different scenarios favouring the opinions will be explored, and the opinions together with their favouring scenarios will be listed in the second Delphi round. When the opinions are consolidated, second Delphi round will then take place. The panellists will rate their agreement on the suggested revisions.

Being tested
End user, Demand side- management, Supply side, Funder, Academia
Keywords
Delphi, Gerontechnology, Outcome indicators, Study methods, Research capacity

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • End userOther

    Participants will provide their opinions in two rounds to reach consensus

  • Demand side- managementOther

    Participants will provide their opinions in two rounds to reach consensus

  • Supply sideOther

    Participants will provide their opinions in two rounds to reach consensus

  • FunderOther

    Participants will provide their opinions in two rounds to reach consensus

  • AcademiaOther

    Participants will provide their opinions in two rounds to reach consensus

Study groups in NCT05595018
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
End userA Delphi study will be conducted with two rounds to reach consensus
Receives: Other: End user
Demand side managementA Delphi study will be conducted with two rounds to reach consensus
Receives: Other: Demand side- management
Supply sideA Delphi study will be conducted with two rounds to reach consensus
Receives: Other: Supply side
FunderA Delphi study will be conducted with two rounds to reach consensus
Receives: Other: Funder
AcademiaA Delphi study will be conducted with two rounds to reach consensus
Receives: Other: Academia

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Degree of consensus on indicators of a "good" companion robot

    The level of agreement on indicators of a "good" companion robot. , the opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 < 75%).

    Measured: 3 months

  2. Degree of consensus on feasible scientific methods and implementation strategies to generate evidence-based results of companion robots

    The level of agreement on feasible scientific methods and implementation strategies to generate evidence-based results of companion robots. , the opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 < 75%).

    Measured: 3 months

  3. Degree of consensus on strategies to build organizational research capacity facilitating the evaluation of gerontechnology products

    The level of agreement on strategies to build organizational research capacity facilitating the evaluation of gerontechnology products. , the opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 < 75%).

    Measured: 3 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted26 Oct 2022
  2. Study start21 Oct 2022
  3. Primary completion31 Mar 2023
  4. Study completion31 Aug 2023

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
87 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05595018
Sponsor's protocol ID
Gerontechnology Delphi
Status last verified
Nov 2023
First submitted
19 Oct 2022
Last updated
18 Nov 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: Individual participant data (IPD) will not be available

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Consensus Development, run by The University of Hong Kong at 1 site in Hong Kong.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 0 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Nov 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Hong Kong. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Degree of consensus on indicators of a "good" companion robot (time frame: 3 months). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Nov 2023.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in