Gathering uncertainties
Methods used (eg, survey, focus groups, interviews): Online survey. Platform used, Jisc Online surveys https://www.jisc.ac.uk and email submissions.
| Number | % | |
| Total respondents (across all methods) | 328 | 109* |
| Total patients and carers | 269 | 82 |
| Total health and care professionals | 87 | 27 |
| Total number of original uncertainties submitted | 999 | 100 |
| Original uncertainties in scope | 860 | 86 |
| Original uncertainties out of scope | 139 | 14 |
Interim prioritisation
Methods used (eg, survey, focus groups, interviews):
| Number | % | |
| Total number of indicative questions (answered & unanswered) | 46 | 100 |
| Number of verified answered questions | 0 | 0 |
| Number of verified unanswered questions | 46 | 100 |
| Number of verified unanswered questions included in the interim prioritisation | 46 | |
| Total respondents (across all methods) | 422 | 99** |
| Total patients friends/family and carers | 341 | 81 |
| Total health and care professionals | 74 | 18 |
| Number of questions taken to final workshop | 18 |
Final priority setting workshop
| Number | % | |
| Total participants | 24 | 100 |
| Total patients and carers | 13 | 54 |
| Total health and care professionals | 11 | 46 |
Notes
e.g. please explain if totals do not add up to 100%
*The total respondents for ‘Total respondents (across all methods)’ does not add up to 100% (109%) because the way the questions were structured in the survey meant that you could answer multiple questions as yes or no. For example, you could be a person with psoriatic arthritis and a health and care professional working with people with psoriatic arthritis. In this example you would be a ‘yes’ for both questions.
**The total respondents for the interim prioritisation survey (patients, friends/family, carers and health and care professionals) does not add up to 100% (99%) because 7 respondents (1%) skipped this question.