title: [Comparison of mail and meeting forms in evaluation of Delphi study].
abstract: To evaluate and compare mail and meeting forms in evaluation of Delphi study.
  
  
  
  Delphi study by mail and meeting approaches was used to determine the health information dataset. Experts were required to grade the listed items through three indexes: importance, necessity and availability. Study duration, coefficient of variation of items, authority coefficient and coordination coefficient of the experts' opinion of two forms of study were calculated and compared.
  
  
  
  The study duration was four months through mail form and 2 days through meeting. Compared with the first round, the coefficient of variation decreased (P<0.001, all of the three indexes by two forms), and the cooperation index increased (P<0.005) in the second round. The experts' opinions were easier to be consistent through meeting than through mail(P<0.033). And the authority coefficient by meeting consultation (0.83 ± 0.05) was higher than that by mail (0.77 ± 0.03) (P=0.001).
  
  
  
  Both mail and meeting forms of Delphi study can determine the health information dataset,but meeting consultation is better and requires shorter study duration.
authors.affiliation: Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Zhejiang University School of Public Health, Hangzhou 310058, China.
authors.forename: Yan-min
authors.initials: YM
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Cai-qian
authors.initials: CQ
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Yin-yin
authors.initials: YY
authors.lastname: Wu
authors.forename: Hui
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Zheng-qiang
authors.initials: ZQ
authors.lastname: Huang
authors.forename: Kun
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Chen
mesh_terms: D003146:Communications Media; D003697:Delphi Technique; D011177:Postal Service; D011996:Records