The scale of attacks on healthcare in emergencies has become better understood through data collection. But less well un\derstood are the consequences of attacks. The purpose of this study was to establish what information could improve our understanding of the impacts of attacks on healthcare. Using the three-round Delphi method, we sought consensus among experts in this field of study of attacks on healthcare to answer the study question. Seventeen experts agreed to take part. The experts generated a total of 222 unique statements identifying those data and information that would improve understanding of the impacts of attacks on healthcare, of which 162 reached consensus. All statements were categorized into 12 themes, each addressing different types of impacts. This Delphi study prepares the groundwork for a research agenda to explore the impacts of attacks on healthcare. These statements will be of use to academics working to expand the evidence base of attacks on healthcare. The study revealed disagreement on how widely the World Health Organization definition of an attack on healthcare should be interpreted and therefore what constitutes an impact of an attack. This is an important finding and further work is required to establish workable definitions for data collection.
Keywords: Attacks on healthcare; health in emergencies; medical care under fire; violence and impacts on health.