ReviewPharmacoEconomics1997
The use of consensus methods and expert panels in pharmacoeconomic studies. Practical applications and methodological shortcomings.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Tools for Assessing Potential Significance of Pharmacist Interventions: A Systematic Review.Drug safety · 2016Pooled it
- AIFM-ed Curriculum Framework for Postgraduate Family Medicine Education on Artificial Intelligence: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- A cost-effectiveness analysis of a novel algorithm to sequentially diagnose leprosy based on manufactured tests under the SUS perspective.Cadernos de saude publica · 2024Article
- Designing a nurse-led assessment and care planning intervention to support frail older people in primary care: An e-Delphi study.Journal of advanced nursing · 2022Article
- Developing a tool for measuring the disaster resilience of healthcare rescuers: a modified Delphi study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Detection and characterization of colorectal polyps using high-definition white light and i-Scan: Evidence-based consensus recommendations using a modified Delphi process.United European gastroenterology journal · 2018Article
- Defining a Brief Intervention for the Promotion of Psychological Well-being among Unemployed Individuals through Expert Consensus.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
- A Delphi consensus panel on nutritional therapy in chronic kidney disease.Journal of nephrology · 2016Review
- Quality indicators for the management of Barrett's esophagus, dysplasia, and esophageal adenocarcinoma: international consensus recommendations from the American Gastroenterological Association Symposium.Gastroenterology · 2015Article
- Probabilistic Markov Model Estimating Cost Effectiveness of Methylphenidate Osmotic-Release Oral System Versus Immediate-Release Methylphenidate in Children and Adolescents: Which Information is Needed?PharmacoEconomics · 2015Article
- Antibacterial Treatment of Meticillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: a Cost and Budget Impact Analysis in Greek Hospitals.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2014Article
- C-QUALITY: cost and quality-of-life pharmacoeconomic analysis of antidepressants used in major depressive disorder in the regional Italian settings of Veneto and Sardinia.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2013Article
- Cost-effectiveness evaluation of escitalopram in major depressive disorder in Italy.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2013Article
- Consensus statements for management of Barrett's dysplasia and early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, based on a Delphi process.Gastroenterology · 2012Article
- Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of beclomethasone/formoterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol in patients with moderate to severe asthma.Clinical drug investigation · 2012Article
- Structuring and validating a cost-effectiveness model of primary asthma prevention amongst children.BMC medical research methodology · 2011Article
- The costs of preventing and treating chagas disease in Colombia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2008Article
- The cost of monitoring warfarin in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation in primary care in Sweden.BMC family practice · 2007Article
- Resource consumption and management associated with monitoring of warfarin treatment in primary health care in Sweden.BMC family practice · 2006Article
- Economic evaluation of intravenous itraconazole for presumed systemic fungal infections in neutropenic patients in Korea.International journal of hematology · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of expert opinion in pharmacoeconomic studies is widespread. A review of the relevant literature has shown that expert opinion is frequently used in decision analysis, Markov models and disease management, with estimates of potential values derived from Delphi panels, modified Delphi panels and expert round tables. These consensus-gathering methods are often applied as if potential drawbacks to their application were absent. This article reviews and summarises the use of these techniques in pharmacoeconomic research and evaluates the potential shortcomings of the methodology employed. In particular, several areas of concern are noted: the provision of baseline information or seed algorithms to panellists, the high attrition rate of panels, the criteria for selecting experts and the definition of consensus. This article offers recommendations for the future application of these techniques and concludes that expert opinion can still play a valuable role in pharmacoeconomic research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10169665What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.