IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i18p6842-d415954.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing an Environmental Health Sciences COVID-19 Research Agenda: Results from the NIEHS Disaster Research Response (DR2) Work Group’s Modified Delphi Method

Author

Listed:
  • Nicole A. Errett

    (Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA 98195, USA)

  • Marilyn Howarth

    (Center of Excellence in Environmental Toxicology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA)

  • Kimberley Shoaf

    (Division of Public Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA)

  • Megan Couture

    (Social & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC 27703, USA)

  • Steven Ramsey

    (Social & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC 27703, USA)

  • Richard Rosselli

    (Social & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC 27703, USA)

  • Sara Webb

    (Social & Scientific Systems, Inc., Durham, NC 27703, USA)

  • April Bennett

    (Contractor, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Bethesda, MD 20892, USA)

  • Aubrey Miller

    (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Bethesda, MD 20892, USA)

Abstract

Leveraging the community of practice recently established through the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Disaster Research Response (DR2) working group, we used a modified Delphi method to identify and prioritize environmental health sciences Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and associated Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) research questions. Twenty-six individuals with broad expertise across a variety of environmental health sciences subdisciplines were selected to participate among 45 self-nominees. In Round 1, panelists submitted research questions and brief justifications. In Round 2, panelists rated the priority of each question on a nine-point Likert scale. Responses were trichotomized into priority categories (low priority; medium priority; and high priority). A research question was determined to meet consensus if at least 69.2% of panelists rated it within the same priority category. Research needs that did not meet consensus in round 2 were redistributed for re-rating. Fourteen questions met consensus as high priority in round 2, and an additional 14 questions met consensus as high priority in round 3. We discuss the impact and limitations of using this approach to identify and prioritize research questions in the context of a disaster response.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicole A. Errett & Marilyn Howarth & Kimberley Shoaf & Megan Couture & Steven Ramsey & Richard Rosselli & Sara Webb & April Bennett & Aubrey Miller, 2020. "Developing an Environmental Health Sciences COVID-19 Research Agenda: Results from the NIEHS Disaster Research Response (DR2) Work Group’s Modified Delphi Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-11, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6842-:d:415954
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6842/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6842/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diana Kwon, 2020. "How swamped preprint servers are blocking bad coronavirus research," Nature, Nature, vol. 581(7807), pages 130-131, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Tam-Tri Le & Viet-Phuong La & Huyen Thanh Thanh Nguyen & Manh-Toan Ho & Quy Khuc & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2022. "Covid-19 vaccines production and societal immunization under the serendipity-mindsponge-3D knowledge management theory and conceptual framework," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Guillaume Cabanac & Theodora Oikonomidi & Isabelle Boutron, 2021. "Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5285-5304, June.
    3. Shelly X Bian & Eugene Lin, 2020. "Competing with a pandemic: Trends in research design in a time of Covid-19," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Ivan Kodvanj & Jan Homolak & Davor Virag & Vladimir Trkulja, 2022. "Publishing of COVID-19 preprints in peer-reviewed journals, preprinting trends, public discussion and quality issues," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1339-1352, March.
    5. Guillaume Cabanac & Ingo Frommholz & Philipp Mayr, 2020. "Scholarly literature mining with information retrieval and natural language processing: Preface," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2835-2840, December.
    6. Annie Collins & Rohan Alexander, 2022. "Reproducibility of COVID-19 pre-prints," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4655-4673, August.
    7. Uddin, Shahadat & Khan, Arif & Lu, Haohui, 2023. "Impact of COVID-19 on Journal Impact Factor," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4).
    8. Jiang, Zhuoren & Lin, Tianqianjin & Huang, Cui, 2023. "Deep representation learning of scientific paper reveals its potential scholarly impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6842-:d:415954. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.