We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
While many medical practitioners value the interactive nature of in-person conferences, results of these interactions are often poorly documented. The objective of this study was to pilot the Delphi method for developing consensus following a national conference and to compare the results between experts who did and did not attend.
Methods:
A 3-round Delphi included experts attending the 2023 Society of Disaster Medicine and Health Preparedness Annual Meeting and experts who were members of the society but did not attend. Conference speakers provided statements related to their presentations. Experts rated the statements on a 1–7 scale for agreement using STAT59 software (STAT59 Services Ltd, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada). Consensus was defined as a standard deviation of ≤ 1.0.
Results:
Seventy-five statements were rated by 27 experts who attended and 10 who did not: 2634 ratings in total. There was no difference in the number of statements reaching consensus in the attending group (26/75) versus that of the nonattending group (27/75) (P = 0.89). However, which statements reached consensus differed between the groups.
Conclusion:
The Delphi method is a viable method to document consensus from a conference. Advantages include the ability to involve large groups of experts, statistical measurement of the degree of consensus, and prioritization of the results.
This study of papers gathered from the proceedings presented at Spanish social psychology conferences explores the use of bibliometrics for studying scientific disciplines. A reference database of all the papers included in the conference proceedings of events held from 1983 to 2000 was generated and classified by thematic area, paper type and author institutional affiliation. The references were laid out on contingency tables and mapped with correspondence analysis. The results show that there is a growing number of co-authored papers and a predominance of empirical over theoretical paper types. Some institutions have a higher concentration of theoretical papers while others work mostly in the areas of organizational and health psychology. In terms of empirical papers, there is a tendency towards generating more qualitative-based studies over the span of time captured by this work. There are also a number of papers written about such areas as cultural psychology that points to the emergence of an interest in critical social psychology. Concluding remarks underline the role of conferences and scientific meetings as an important indicator of the dynamic development of a scientific discipline.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.