Primary Objective: To define what measures of wellbeing in doctors in the National Health Service should be used.
Secondary Objective: To define what measures of wellbeing in doctors in the National Health Service should be used for.
Primary Endpoint: A consensus opinion on a core outcome set to measure the wellbeing of doctors in the National Health Service.
Secondary Endpoint: A consensus opinion on what a core outcome set measuring the wellbeing of doctors in the National Health Service should be used for.
Principal Investigator: Dr Gemma Simons
Supervisors: Prof David Baldwin and Prof Julia Sinclair
- COS for clinical trials or clinical research
- COS for practice
- Consensus conference
- Delphi process
- Focus group(s)
- Systematic review
The Delphi method of asking a group of experts to respond to questionnaires will be used to obtain a consensus opinion. The questionnaires are informed by a systematic review of wellbeing measures used in doctors. The first Delphi round will be conducted face to face at a conference. Subsequent rounds will be conducted online.
Experts are defined in this study as “individuals who have been or are involved in the concept, design, organisation, delivery, teaching, audit, governance, policy, guidance, or research, of wellbeing in health and social care professional wellbeing”. Experts from regulatory bodies and commissioners will also be included.
Experts were identified through previous wellbeing conference proceedings, publications on wellbeing including policy and guidance and recommendations from other experts.
Experts will be given the summarised results of surveys and individual interviews completed by doctors to help inform their answers. They will also be given the summarised results of patient and the public focus groups.
The 9 point Likert scale will be used in the Delphi Surveys. Where 75% of participants have scored an outcome 1-3, this outcome will be considered of limited importance. Where an outcome is score 4-6 by 75% of participants, an outcome will be considered important, but not critical. When an outcome is scored 7-9 by 75% of participants it will be considered critical.