Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Expert agreed standards for the selection and development of cancer support group leaders: an online reactive Delphi study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to develop pragmatic, consensus-based minimum standards for the role of a cancer support group leader. Secondly, to produce a structured interview designed to assess the knowledge, skills and attributes of the individuals who seek to undertake the role.

Methods

An expert panel of 73 academics, health professionals, cancer agency workers and cancer support group leaders were invited to participate in a reactive online Delphi study involving three online questionnaire rounds. Participants determined and ranked requisite knowledge, skills and attributes (KSA) for cancer support group leaders, differentiated ideal from required KSA to establish minimum standards, and agreed on a method of rating KSA to determine suitability and readiness.

Results

Forty-five experts (62%) participated in round 1, 36 (49%) in round 2 and 23 (31%) in round 3. In round 1, experts confirmed 59 KSA identified via a systemic review and identified a further 55 KSA. In round 2, using agreement ≥75%, 52 KSA emerged as minimum standards for support group leaders. In round 3, consensus was reached on almost every aspect of the content and structure of a structured interview. Panel member comments guided refinement of wording, re-ordering of questions and improvement of probing questions.

Conclusions

Alongside a novel structured interview, the first consensus-based minimum standards have been developed for cancer support group leaders, incorporating expert consensus and pragmatic considerations. Pilot and field testing will be used to appraise aspects of clinical utility and establish a rational scoring model for the structured interview.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hawkes AL, Hughes KL, Hutchison SD, Chambers SK (2010) Feasibility of brief psychological distress screening by a community-based telephone helpline for cancer patients and carers. BMC Cancer 10(1):14. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-10-14

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Kangas M, Henry JL, Bryant RA (2002) Posttraumatic stress disorder following cancer: a conceptual and empirical review. Clin Psychol Rev 22(4):499–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Zabora J, BrintzenhofeSzoc K, Curbow B, Hooker C, Piantadosi S (2001) The prevalence of psychological distress by cancer site. Psycho-Oncology 10(1):19–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Grassi L, Johansen C, Annunziata MA, Capovilla E, Costantini A, Gritti P, Torta R, Bellani M, on behalf of the Italian Society of Psycho-Oncology Distress Thermometer Study G (2013) Screening for distress in cancer patients. Cancer 119(9):1714–1721. doi:10.1002/cncr.27902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dunn J, Steginga SK, Rosoman N, Millichap D (2003) A review of peer support in the context of cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol 21(2):55–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Yaskowich KM, Stam HJ (2003) Cancer narratives and the cancer support group. J Health Psychol 8(6):720–737

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ussher J, Kirsten L, Butow P, Sandoval M (2006) What do cancer support groups provide which other supportive relationships do not? The experience of peer support groups for people with cancer. Soc Sci Med 62(10):2565–2576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schaefer C, Coyne JC, Lazarus RS (1981) The health-related functions of social support. J Behav Med 4(4):381–406

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lieberman MA, Golant M (2002) Leader behaviors as perceived by cancer patients in professionally directed support groups and outcomes. Group Dyn: Theory Res Pract 6(4):267–276. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.6.4.267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kirsten L, Butow P, Price M, Hobbs K, Sunquist K (2006) Who helps the leaders? Difficulties experienced by cancer support group leaders. Support Care Cancer 14(7):770–778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zordan RD, Butow PN, Kirsten L, Juraskova I, O’Reilly A, Friedsam J, Bovopolous N, Heinrich P, Charles M, Hobbs K (2012) The development of novel interventions to assist the leaders of cancer support groups. Support Care Cancer 20(3):445–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Butow P, Ussher J, Kirsten L, Hobbs K, Smith K, Wain G, Sandoval M, Stenlake A (2006) Sustaining leaders of cancer support groups: the role, needs, and difficulties of leaders. Soc Work Health Care 42(2):39–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Delisle VC, Gumuchian ST, Kloda LA, Boruff J, El-Baalbaki G, Körner A, Malcarne VL, Thombs BD, Connolly K, Dyas L (2016) Effect of support group peer facilitator training programmes on peer facilitator and support group member outcomes: a systematic review. BMJ Open 6(11):e013325

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Boulkedid R, Abdoul H, Loustau M, Sibony O, Alberti C (2011) Using and reporting the Delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review. PLoS One 6(6):e20476

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Sackett D, Straus S, Richardson W, Rosenberg W, Haynes B (2000) Evidence-based medicine. Churchill Livingstone

  16. Celermajer DS (2001) Evidence-based medicine: how good is the evidence? Med J Aust 174(6):293–295

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. McKenna HP (1994) The Delphi technique: a worthwhile research approach for nursing? J Adv Nurs 19(6):1221–1225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Murphy M, Black N, Lamping D, McKee C, Sanderson C, Askham J, Marteau T (1998) Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England) 2 (3):i

  19. Rowe G, Wright G (2011) The Delphi technique: past, present, and future prospects—introduction to the special issue. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 78(9):1487–1490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hoddinott SN, Bass MJ (1986) The dillman total design survey method. Can Fam Physician 32:2366

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Pomery A, Schofield P, Xhilaga M, Gough K (2016) Skills, knowledge and attributes of support group leaders: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 99(5):672–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Australian Human Rights Commission www.humanrights.gov.au. Accessed 2/02/2017

  23. Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, Pencharz PB, Ling SC, Moore AM, Wales PW (2014) Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol 67(4):401–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Leach MJ, Segal L (2011) Patient attributes warranting consideration in clinical practice guidelines, health workforce planning and policy. BMC Health Serv Res 11(1):221

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Caballero CL, Walker A, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M (2011) The work readiness scale (WRS): developing a measure to assess work readiness in college graduates. J Teach Learn Grad Employability 2(2):41–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dipboye RL, Wooten K, Halverson SK (2004) Behavioral and situational interviews. In: Thomas JC (ed) Comprehensive Handbook of Psychological Assessment, Industrial and Organizational Assessment, vol 4. John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, pp 297–316

    Google Scholar 

  27. Reeve B, Wyrwich KW, Wu AW, Velikova G, Terwee CB, Snyder CF, Schwartz C, Revicki DA, Moinpour CM, McLeod LD, Lyons JC, Lenderking WR, Hinds PS, Hays RD, Greenhalgh J, Gershon R, Feeny D, Fayers PM, Cella D, Brundage M, Ahmed S, Aaronson NK, Butt Z (2012) ISOQOL recommendations minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research. Qual Life Res 22:1889–1905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. United States Office of Personnel Management (2008) Structured Interviews: Interview Guide and Evaluation Materials for Structured Interviews

  29. Public Service Commission of Canada (2009) Structured interviewing: how to design and conduct structured interviews for an appointment process. Assessment Oversight and the Personnel Psychology Centre

  30. Wickham HC, W. (2016) ggplot2: an implementation of grammar of graphics. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ggplot2/index.html

  31. Price M, Butow P, Kirsten L (2006) Support and training needs of cancer support group leaders: a review. Psycho-Oncology 15(8):651–663. doi:10.1002/pon.1009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Jackson CAS (2002) Support groups for dementia caregivers: predicting facilitator behavior within an ecological model. ProQuest Information & Learning, US

    Google Scholar 

  33. Zordan RD, Juraskova I, Butow PN, Jolan A, Kirsten L, Chapman J, Sedgwick C, Charles M, Sundquist K (2010) Exploring the impact of training on the experience of Australian support group leaders: current practices and implications for research. Health Expect: Int J Publ Particip Health Care Health Policy 13(4):427–440. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00592.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Herron L-M (2005) Building effective cancer support groups. Report to the Department of Health and Ageing, The Cancer Council Australia

    Google Scholar 

  35. Steginga SK, Pinnock C, Gardner M, Dunn J (2005) Evaluating peer support for prostate cancer: the prostate cancer peer support inventory. BJU Int 95(1):46–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Noeres D, Park-Simon T-W, Grabow J, Sperlich S, Koch-Gießelmann H, Jaunzeme J, Geyer S (2013) Return to work after treatment for primary breast cancer over a 6-year period: results from a prospective study comparing patients with the general population. Support Care Cancer 21(7):1901–1909

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Oliffe JL, Halpin M, Bottorff JL, Hislop TG, McKenzie M, Mroz L (2008) How prostate cancer support groups do and do not survive: British Columbian perspectives. Am J Mens Health 2(2):143–155. doi:10.1177/1557988307304147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Stang I, Mittelmark MB (2008) Social support and interpersonal stress in professional-led breast cancer self-help groups. Int J Ment Health Promot 10(2):15–25. doi:10.1080/14623730.2008.9721759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pavur EJ Jr (2010) Use job descriptions to support leadership. Psychol Manag J 13(2):119–122

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Amanda Pomery is sponsored by Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, supported by the Department of Cancer Experiences Research Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and supported through an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia

    Amanda Pomery & Penelope Schofield

  2. Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, Melbourne, Australia

    Amanda Pomery & Miranda Xhilaga

  3. Department of Psychology, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, Arts and Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia

    Penelope Schofield

  4. Department of Cancer Experiences Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

    Penelope Schofield & Karla Gough

  5. Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia

    Penelope Schofield

  6. Faculty of Health, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia

    Miranda Xhilaga

  7. Department of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia

    Karla Gough

Authors
  1. Amanda Pomery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Penelope Schofield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miranda Xhilaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Karla Gough
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda Pomery.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The authors had full control over all primary data and will allow the journal to review the data if requested.

Appendix A: Precluded items deemed discriminatory

Appendix A: Precluded items deemed discriminatory

Diagnosed less than 2 years

Undergoing treatment/active disease/physically very ill

Serious mental illness/personality disorder

End-of-life stage illness

Recently bereaved or dealing with complicated grief issues

Bias or strong beliefs related to treatment (alternative therapies)

Criminal history

Highly anxious/acute distress

Cognitive impairment

Inappropriate match for group membership (e.g. age and gender)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pomery, A., Schofield, P., Xhilaga, M. et al. Expert agreed standards for the selection and development of cancer support group leaders: an online reactive Delphi study. Support Care Cancer 26, 99–108 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3819-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3819-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation