Health Care Management Science

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 105–110 | Cite as

A consensus process for identifying a prioritised list of study questions

  • Martin Utley
  • Steve Gallivan
  • Mary Mills
  • Marisa Mason
  • Christobel Hargraves
Article

Abstract

A consensus process has been developed to assist the UK National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death in identifying questions to be addressed in its studies. The process utilises the knowledge and experience of a panel of experts via a facilitated brainstorming exercise and employs a robust voting system to produce a list of candidate questions ordered in terms of the preferences expressed by individual panel members. The process which is described has been used successfully to assist the design of two national studies and it is anticipated that the process will be adopted for many studies in the future.

Keywords

Consensus Voting Networks and graphs Study design Algorithms 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    NCEPOD (2003) The 2003 report of the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death, London)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    NCEPOD (2004) Scoping our practice (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death, London)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    NCEPOD (2005) An Acute Problem (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death, London)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    UK Department of Health (2001) National Service Framework for Older People (UK Department of Health, London), pp 55Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arrow K (1963) Social choice and individual values. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rogers J (1999) Facilitating groups (Management Futures Ltd, London)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dasgupta P, Maskin E (2004) The fairest vote of all. Scientific American, MarchGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    C-de Borda, Memoire sur les Elections au Scrutin (Histoire de l’Académie Royale des Sciences, Paris, 1781). English translation in A De Grazia, Mathematical Derivation of an Election System. Isis 44(1953):42-51Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Siegel AF (1988) Statistics and data analysis: an introduction. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M-de Condorcet, Essai sur l’application de l’analyse à la probabilité des décisions rendues à la pleuralité des voix (Imprimerie Royal, Paris, 1785), excerpted and translated in I McLean, F Hewitt, Condorcet: foundations of political theory and social choice (Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Utley
    • 1
  • Steve Gallivan
    • 1
  • Mary Mills
    • 1
  • Marisa Mason
    • 2
  • Christobel Hargraves
    • 2
  1. 1.Clinical Operational Research UnitUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and DeathLondonUK

Personalised recommendations