Do practicing clinicians agree with expert ratings of neonatal intensive care unit quality measures?

Objective:to assess the level of agreement when selecting quality measures for inclusion in a composite index of neonatal intensive care quality (baby-monitor) between two panels: one comprised of academic researchers (delphi) and another comprised of academic and clinical neonatologists (clinician).study design:in a modified delphi process, a panel rated 28 quality measures. we assessed clinician agreement with the delphi panel by surveying a sample of 48 neonatal intensive care practitioners. we asked the clinician group to indicate their level of agreement with the delphi panel for each measure using a five-point scale (much too high, slightly too high, reasonable, slightly too low and much too low). in addition, we asked clinicians to select measures for inclusion in the baby-monitor based on a yes or no vote and a pre-specified two-thirds majority for inclusion.result:in all, 23 (47.9%) of the clinicians responded to the survey. we found high levels of agreement between the delphi and clinician panels, particularly across measures selected for the baby-monitor. clinicians selected the same nine measures for inclusion in the composite as the delphi panel. for these nine measures, 74% of clinicians indicated that the delphi panel rating was ‘reasonable’.conclusion:practicing clinicians agree with an expert panel on the measures that should be included in the baby-monitor, enhancing face validity.