Lung Ultrasound Delphi SIMRI-SIMEUP

Dataset description Title Individual respondent data from a modified Delphi consensus on the clinical boundaries and appropriate use of lung ultrasound (LUS) in pediatrics (SIMRI–SIMEUP). Summary This dataset contains the de-identified, individual-level responses underlying the study "Clinical Boundaries and Appropriate Use of Lung Ultrasound in Pediatrics: A Delphi Study." It comprises the raw Likert ratings provided by each expert panelist across three sequential rounds of a modified Delphi process, together with the responses to a post-Delphi qualitative follow-up survey. The data are the primary source from which all aggregated response distributions reported in the article and its supplementary tables were derived. The consensus process was conducted electronically between February and July 2025 among pediatric physicians selected against predefined eligibility criteria (structured training, more than 1,500 point-of-care ultrasound examinations, and a leadership or teaching role in point-of-care ultrasound), recruited through the Italian Pediatric Respiratory Society (SIMRI) and the Italian Society of Pediatric Emergency and Urgent Care (SIMEUP). Each statement was rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Consensus was defined a priori as at least 75% of panelists rating a statement within the 4–5 range. Contents The dataset is provided as a single Excel workbook (LUS_Delphi_individual_responses.xlsx) with the following sheets: Round 1 — 33 respondents × 52 statements.Round 2 — 34 respondents × 27 statements (statements re-administered after Round 1).Round 3 — 26 respondents × 7 statements (statements still without consensus, plus synthesis statements).Follow-up survey — 29 respondents; categorical and free-text answers exploring reasons for persistent disagreement.Codebook — maps each round and item code (Q01, Q02, …) to the full statement text as administered in the original (Italian) questionnaire.Long — a tidy, analysis-ready table with one row per answer (2,816 rows): respondent_id, round, item_code, rating. In the per-round sheets, rows are individual respondents and columns are statements; each cell holds that respondent's Likert rating (1–5). Because the statement order in the source forms differs from the numbering used in the manuscript, the Codebook should be used to match items to the published statements. Variables respondent_id — sequential, per-round anonymous identifier (e.g., R1_01).round — Delphi round (1, 2, 3) or Follow-up.item_code — questionnaire item identifier within a round.rating — Likert response, integer 1–5. Anonymization and ethics The data contain no personal or identifying information. Submission timestamps were removed and respondents were assigned sequential identifiers. In the follow-up survey, the optional field in which panelists could leave an e-mail address to be contacted for an interview was deleted and replaced by a Yes/No interview_available flag; any e-mail addresses appearing within free-text answers were removed. Responses were collected anonymously and respondent identifiers are not linkable across rounds (e.g., R1_01 and R2_01 are not the same individual). Participation was voluntary, completion of the survey constituted consent, and the study was considered exempt from formal Institutional Review Board approval under applicable national regulations and institutional policy governing survey-based research among healthcare professionals. Provenance and integrity The dataset was exported from the original electronic data-collection forms. As an integrity check, the agreement percentages recomputed from these individual responses reproduce exactly the values reported in the article's tables and supplementary tables (Round 1 matched all 52 statements against Supplementary Table 1; Round 3 matched all 7 statements against Table 1; all 26 reported Round 2 values were confirmed). One additional Round 2 item present in the raw form ("LUS requires recognized theoretical and practical training"; 82.4% agreement) was retained here for completeness although it was not tabulated in the published supplementary material.