Ignacio Borque, Aida Cordero Botejara, Jesús Martín-Martín, Teresa Salcedo-Peris, Jacinto Bátiz Cantera, Claudio Calvo Espinós, Agnès Calsina Berna, Ana Carvajal-Valcárcel, María Jesús de-la-Ossa-Sendra, Luis Alberto Flores Pérez, Marina Gandía Herrero, Xavier Gómez-Batiste-Alentorn, Lourdes Guanter Peris, Francisca Rosa Jiménez López, Joaquim Julià-Torras, María Luisa Martín-Roselló, Tania Pastrana, José Luis Pereira, María Varela Cerdeira, Eduardo Bruera, Alberto Alonso Babarro
A consensus-based set of 21 quality indicators for postgraduate academic programs in palliative care was developed, providing a structured framework for evaluation. The findings highlight a key challenge in balancing essential educational domains with their measurability. These indicators may support more consistent assessment and comparability across programs, although further validation, implementation testing, and international adaptation are needed.
BACKGROUND: Despite growing recognition of palliative care as a global health priority, postgraduate academic programs in palliative care remain highly heterogeneous and lack operational frameworks for quality evaluation.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a consensus-based set of quality indicators for the evaluation of postgraduate academic programs in palliative care, based on expert consensus within the Spanish context.
METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted with a panel of 19 experts in palliative care and education. Over three rounds, participants assessed proposed indicators according to essentiality, clarity, and measurability. Consensus was defined as a mean score ≥3 and ≥75% agreement.
RESULTS: The process resulted in 21 indicators grouped into six domains. Agreement increased across rounds, and all final indicators achieved mean scores above 3.0 across the three dimensions assessed. All final indicators were considered both essential and measurable.
CONCLUSIONS: A consensus-based set of 21 quality indicators for postgraduate academic programs in palliative care was developed, providing a structured framework for evaluation. The findings highlight a key challenge in balancing essential educational domains with their measurability. These indicators may support more consistent assessment and comparability across programs, although further validation, implementation testing, and international adaptation are needed.