Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39696176›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

A multi-stage approach to support timely health policy decisions during crisis: the fast-track Delphi.

Camille Velarde Crézé, Olivier Duperrex, Luc Lebon, Vincent Faivre, Myriam Pasche, Jacques Cornuz

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Electronic cigarette for smoking cessation: a fast-track Delphi consensus of French-speaking experts.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Camille Velarde CrézéDepartment of Health Promotion and Prevention, University Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Route de Berne 113, Lausanne, CH - 1010, Switzerland. camille.velarde@unisante.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4686-9401
Olivier DuperrexDepartment of Health Promotion and Prevention, University Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Route de Berne 113, Lausanne, CH - 1010, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0932-6846
Luc LebonDepartment of Health Promotion and Prevention, University Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Route de Berne 113, Lausanne, CH - 1010, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6754-8033
Vincent FaivreDirection of Finances - Informatics Systems and Digital Transformation Unit, University Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Myriam PascheDepartment of Health Promotion and Prevention, University Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Route de Berne 113, Lausanne, CH - 1010, Switzerland.
Jacques CornuzUniversity Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1276-9717

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundScientists can play an important role in policymaking by providing evidence and consensual expert opinion on the state of scientific knowledge. Delphi surveys have been widely used to develop consensus on a topical issue, yet not compatible with public health crisis situations requiring rapid decisions. We developed a fast-track Delphi process, providing experts with a structured approach to rapidly develop and quantify consensus in support of informed policy decisions.

methodsWe identified key elements of consensus-building techniques through a literature review and derived methodological procedures that served as the basis for the elaboration of the new process. Selected methodological experts provided advice on necessary adjustments. The process was pilot tested using a real-world public health issue.

resultsThe fast-track Delphi process is a hybrid approach between a conventional Delphi and the nominal group technique: one group session followed by two rounds of e-questionnaire, with predefined steps. We developed an ad hoc toolkit (REDCap templates, R code for analysis and production of reports, user guide) to overcome time constraints, which we pilot tested with experts. The feasibility test conducted in 18 days in the field of tobacco control demonstrated the applicability and usefulness of the process in real-world conditions.

conclusionsWe strongly believe that this fast-track Delphi process has the potential to help inform policy decisions in various types of crises, including emerging diseases or novel potentially harmful products.

Indexed as

ConsensusDelphi TechniqueHealth PolicyPolicy MakingHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesConsensual agreementConsensusCrisisDelphiExpert opinionMethodological developmentNominal group techniquePolicymaking supportRapidityToolkit

Identifiers

PMID39696176
PMCPMC11653821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.