Background: Motor learning is central to domains such as sports and rehabilitation; however, often terminologies are insufficiently uniform to allow effective sharing of experience or translation of knowledge. A study using a Delphi technique was conducted to ascertain level of agreement between experts from different motor learning domains (i.e., therapists, coaches, researchers) with respect to definitions and descriptions of a fundamental conceptual distinction within motor learning, namely implicit and explicit motor learning. Methods: A Delphi technique was embedded in multiple rounds of a survey designed to collect and aggregate informed opinions of 49 international respondents with expertise related to motor learning. The survey was administered via an online survey program and accompanied by feedback after each round. Consensus was considered to be reached if $70% of the experts agreed on a topic. Results: Consensus was reached with respect to definitions of implicit and explicit motor learning, and seven common primary intervention strategies were identified in the context of implicit and explicit motor learning. Consensus was not reached with respect to whether the strategies promote implicit or explicit forms of learning. Discussion: The definitions and descriptions agreed upon may aid translation and transfer of knowledge between domains in the field of motor learning. Empirical and clinical research is required to confirm the accuracy of the definitions and to explore the feasibility of the strategies that were identified in research, everyday practice and education.
DOCUMENT
Background Identify and establish consensus regarding potential prognostic factors for the development of chronic pain after a first episode of idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain. Design This study used two consensus group methods: a modified Nominal Group (m-NGT) and a Delphi Technique. Methods The goal of the m-NGT was to obtain and categorize a list of potential modifiable prognostic factors. These factors were presented to a multidisciplinary panel in a two-round Delphi survey, which was conducted between November 2018 and January 2020. The participants were asked whether factors identified are of prognostic value, whether these factors are modifiable, and how to measure these factors in clinical practice. Consensus was a priori defined as 70% agreement among participants. Results Eighty-four factors were identified and grouped into seven categories during the expert meeting using the modified NGT. A workgroup reduced the list to 47 factors and grouped them into 12 categories. Of these factors, 26 were found to be potentially prognostic for chronification of neck pain (> 70% agreement). Twenty-one out of these 26 factors were found to be potentially modifiable by physiotherapists based on a two-round Delphi survey. Conclusion Based on an expert meeting (m-NGT) and a two-round Delphi survey, our study documents consensus (> 70%) on 26 prognostic factors. Twenty-one out of these 26 factors were found to be modifiable, and most factors were psychological in nature.
DOCUMENT
Background: Chronic constipation is common in people with intellectual disabilities, and seems to be highly prevalent in people with severe or profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (SPIMD). However, there is no current widely accepted definition for the constipation experienced by these individuals. Aim: This Delphi study aims to compile a list of operationalized criteria and symptoms of constipation in people with SPIMD based on practical experiences of and consensus between experts supporting them. Methods: A two-round Delphi study with an intermediate evaluation and analyses was conducted. Parents and relatives of persons with SPIMD and support professionals were included. The panel answered statements and open questions about symptoms and criteria of constipation. They were also requested to provide their opinion about classifying criteria and symptoms into domains. Answers to statements were analysed separately after both rounds with regard to consensus rate and displayed qualitatively; answers to open questions were analysed deductively. Results: In the first Delphi round (n = 47), consensus was achieved on criteria within the domains 'Defecation’ and 'Physical features', that were assigned to broader categories. Symptoms retrieved within the domain ‘Behavioural/Emotional’ were brought back to the panel as statements. After the second Delphi round (n = 38), consensus was reached on questions about domains, and for eight criteria (domain ‘Defecation’ n = 5; domain ‘Physical features n = 3). Within the domain ‘Behavioural/Emotional’, consensus was achieved for five symptoms. Criteria and symptoms with consensus >70% were considered ‘generic’ and
DOCUMENT
The increasing concentration of people in urban environments in an era of globalisation means that social, economic, and environmental resources for living and working are under pressure. Urban communities experience increased stress levels due to inadequate and overburdened infrastructure and services, challenges due to ethnic and cultural diversity, socio-economic inequalities as well as the impact of environmental degradation. For these communities to build resilience under these circumstances therefore requires a multipronged approach. The underlying question this project will answer is: “What are the key characteristics of experiencescapes that contribute to resilience-building in communities?” The project will dive into the identification of building blocks of experiencescapes and roles of relevant actors that can support communities in building resilience. Within the context of a multidisciplinary approach, this project applies a range of qualitative research methods, such as in-depth interviews, focus groups, participant observation, storytelling techniques, life stories, as well as various biometric quantitative methods, available through the experience lab of BUas. The outcome of the project will enable practitioners and researchers alike in various sectors to understand what and how they can contribute to creating an environment in which people can meaningfully interact in a way that builds resilience in communities. This outcome is communicated not only through academic publications and conference contributions, but also through public reports and a handbook for practitioners and students. These reports and handbooks support identification and application of building blocks of experiencescapes that support building resilience in communities. Finally, the knowledge generated in the project will contribute to the development of curricula of various educational programmes at Breda University of Applied Sciences by expanding the scope of experience design into the area of people-to-people relationships.
