Abstract

BackgroundConsensus-based approaches provide an alternative to evidence-based decision making, especially in situations where high-level evidence is limited. Our aim was to demonstrate a novel source of information, objective consensus based on recommendations in decision tree format from multiple sources.MethodsBased on nine sample recommendations in decision tree format a representative analysis was performed. The most common (mode) recommendations for each eventuality (each permutation of parameters) were determined. The same procedure was applied to real clinical recommendations for primary radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Data was collected from 16 radiation oncology centres, converted into decision tree format and analyzed in order to determine the objective consensus.ResultsBased on information from multiple sources in decision tree format, treatment recommendations can be assessed for every parameter combination. An objective consensus can be determined by means of mode recommendations without compromise or confrontation among the parties. In the clinical example involving prostate cancer therapy, three parameters were used with two cut-off values each (Gleason score, PSA, T-stage) resulting in a total of 27 possible combinations per decision tree. Despite significant variations among the recommendations, a mode recommendation could be found for specific combinations of parameters.ConclusionRecommendations represented as decision trees can serve as a basis for objective consensus among multiple parties.

Highlights

  • Many clinical decisions in medicine are based on formal and informal consensus agreements and recommendations [1], especially when the level of evidence is not sufficient [2]

  • This study aims to demonstrate how standardised elements [17], can be implemented to analyse and compare multiple recommendations from various parties in order to provide an account of unbiased consensus

  • By a direct comparison of two decision trees the parameters of both are implemented in the result

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Many clinical decisions in medicine are based on formal and informal consensus agreements and recommendations [1], especially when the level of evidence is not sufficient [2]. Even where evidence is available, this does not always translate into evidence-based practice due to lack of competency and is Several consensus methods exist, including the Delphi process, the nominal group technique and the consensus development conference [1,9]. All of these modalities rely on discussion, negotiation, moderation and human judgement and are subjective. Our aim was to demonstrate a novel source of information, objective consensus based on recommendations in decision tree format from multiple sources

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call