Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29308534›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2018

Recommendations from Two Citizens' Juries on the Surgical Management of Obesity.

P A Scuffham, R Krinks, K Chalkidou, P Littlejohns, J A Whitty, A Wilson, P Burton, E Kendall

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Citizens' Jury as a Strategy to Increase Social Participation Among Older People.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Creating sustainable health care systems.Journal of health organization and management · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

P A ScuffhamMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. p.scuffham@griffith.edu.au.
R KrinksMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
K ChalkidouImperial College London, London, UK.
P LittlejohnsKings College London, London, UK.
J A WhittyUniversity of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
A WilsonMenzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
P BurtonCities Research Institute, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
E KendallMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

Adelaide Health Service Incorporated INC N/AAustralian Research Council LP100200446Medical Research Council MR/R015600/1Metro South Hospital and Health Service N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is important that guidelines and criteria used to prioritise access to bariatric surgery are informed by the values of the tax-paying public in combination with the expertise of healthcare professionals. Citizens' juries are increasingly used around the world to engage the public in healthcare decision-making. This study investigated citizens' juries about prioritising patient access to bariatric surgery in two Australian cities.

objectivesThe objective of this study is to examine public priorities for government expenditure on the surgical management of obesity developed through either a one or three-day citizen jury. SUBJECTS/

methodsA three-day jury was held in Brisbane and a one-day jury in Adelaide. Jurors were selected in Brisbane (n = 18) and in Adelaide (n = 12) according to pre-specified criteria. Expert witnesses from various medical disciplines and consumers were cross-examined by jurors.

resultsThe verdicts of the juries were similar in that both juries agreed bariatric surgery was an important option in the management of obesity and related comorbidities. Recommendations about who should receive treatment differed slightly across the juries. Both juries rejected the use of age as a rationing tool, but managed their objections in different ways. Participants' experiences of the jury process were positive, but our observations suggested that many variables may influence the nature of the final verdict.

conclusionsCitizen's juries, even when shorter in duration, can be an effective tool to guide the development of health policy and priorities. However, our study has identified a range of variables that should be considered when designing and running a jury and when interpreting the verdict.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationPractice Guidelines as TopicAustraliaHealth PolicyHumansObesity, MorbidCitizen councilDecision-makingObesity managementPublic engagement

Identifiers

PMID29308534

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.