The objective of this study was to validate the format and contents of an instrument to assess research projects that apply for a fellowship by the Sociedad Argentina de Pediatría using an expert consultation technique, such as the Delphi method. Material and methods. A coordinating group selected a panel of research experts who were members of the Sociedad Argentina de Pediatría, designed, and analyzed each of the rounds of consultations. Semistructured questionnaires were sent by personalized e-mail. Agreement among experts ≥ 80 % was established as the criterion for consensus. At each round of consultation, non-consensual aspects were reformulated and new aspects suggested by experts were included. A measure of stability to conclude the consultation was determined when more than 70 % of experts sustained their opinion in successive rounds. Results. Thirteen research experts participated in the process. After 3 rounds, the consultation process was concluded. The consensual instrument contains 47 items. In relation to the total score, 10 % corresponds to the general presentation; 40 %, to methodological quality; 20 %, to relevance and applicability; 20 %, to feasibility;and10%,tothefellow'sanddirector's background. Conclusions. The format and contents of the instrument to assess research projects that apply for a fellowship by the SociedadArgentina de Pediatría were validated based on expert consensus and objective assessment criteria were established.
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/facundo-garcia-bournissen/28/