Literature DB >> 2228459

Format and conduct of consensus development conferences. Multi-nation comparison.

E A McGlynn1, J Kosecoff, R H Brook.   

Abstract

The consensus development conference method developed by the National Institutes of Health in the United States has been adopted and modified by a number of countries. Based on published articles and communication with representatives from each country, we examined whether the organization and conduct of these conferences in nine countries (United States, Canada, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom) enhanced or detracted from achieving the stated conference goals and objectives. We conclude that improvements in the process by which consensus conferences are conducted may be warranted. More scientific methods for synthesizing literature, such as meta-analysis, should be used in developing inputs for the conference panel. Formalizing the decision-making processes through polling or other methods that allow for structured disagreement with parts of a consensus statement would potentially expand the range and type of issues that can be addressed in such conferences. Finally, countries should consider having the consensus statement written over a longer period of time than the traditional overnight session, which seems unlikely to promote clear thinking.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2228459     DOI: 10.1017/s0266462300001045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  23 in total

1.  Consensus conferences must include a systematic search and categorization of the evidence.

Authors:  S Sauerland; E Neugebauer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Standards, guidelines and clinical policies.

Authors:  A M Clarfield
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1992-08-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  [Consensus methods: review of original methods and their main alternatives used in public health].

Authors:  F Bourrée; P Michel; L R Salmi
Journal:  Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 1.019

4.  Consensus methods as tools to assess medical technologies.

Authors:  E Neugebauer; H Troidl
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Consensus methods for medical and health services research.

Authors:  J Jones; D Hunter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-08-05

Review 6.  Setting standards of prescribing performance in primary care: use of a consensus group of general practitioners and application of standards to practices in the north of England.

Authors:  D N Bateman; M Eccles; M Campbell; J Soutter; S J Roberts; J M Smith
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Development of guidelines for general practice care.

Authors:  R Grol
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  A comparison of clinically important differences in health-related quality of life for patients with chronic lung disease, asthma, or heart disease.

Authors:  Kathleen W Wyrwich; William M Tierney; Ajit N Babu; Kurt Kroenke; Fredric D Wolinsky
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 9.  Clinically important changes in health-related quality of life for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: an expert consensus panel report.

Authors:  Kathleen W Wyrwich; Stephan D Fihn; William M Tierney; Kurt Kroenke; Ajit N Babu; Fredric D Wolinsky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of selective decontamination of the digestive tract. Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract Trialists' Collaborative Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-08-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.