Objective: To establish priority gaps related to contextual factors (CFs) research and force-based manipulation (FBM).
Methods: A three-round Delphi following recommended guidelines for conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES) involving international and interdisciplinary panelists with expertise in CFs and FBM. Round 1 was structured around two prompting questions created by the workgroup. Ranking of each priority gap was done by calculating composite scores for each theme generated. Consensus threshold was set with an agreement ≥75% among panelists. Median and interquartile range were calculated for each priority gap to provide the central tendency of responses. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to evaluate the consistency and stability of responses between rounds 2 and 3.
Results: Forty-six panelists participated in all three rounds of the Delphi. Consensus was reached for 16 of 19 generated themes for priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The ranking of each identified gap was computed and presented. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was non-significant (P > .05), demonstrating consistency and stability of results between rounds.
Conclusion: The result of this Delphi provides international and interdisciplinary consensus-based priority gaps in CFs research and FBM. The gaps identified can be used to generate future research inquiries involving CFs research and FBM.
Keywords: Contextual factors; Delphi study; force-based manipulation; manual therapy; outcomes; priority gaps.