Katalog Plus
Bibliothek der Frankfurt UAS
Bald neuer Katalog: sichern Sie sich schon vorab Ihre persönlichen Merklisten im Nutzerkonto: Anleitung.
Dieses Ergebnis aus BASE kann Gästen nicht angezeigt werden.  Login für vollen Zugriff.

Panel stacking is a threat to consensus statement validity

Title: Panel stacking is a threat to consensus statement validity
Authors: Kepp, Kasper; Aavitsland, Preben; Ballin, Marcel; Balloux, Francois; Baral, Stefan; Bardosh, Kevin; Bauchner, Howard; Bendavid, Eran; Bhopal, Raj; Blumstein, Daniel; Boffetta, Paolo; Bourgeois, Florence; Brufsky, Adam; Collignon, Peter; Cripps, Sally; Cristea, Ioana; Curtis, Nigel; Djulbegovic, Benjamin; Faude, Oliver; Flacco, Maria Elena; Guyatt, Gordon; Hajishengallis, George; Hemkens, Lars; Hoffmann, Tammy; Joffe, Ari; Klassen, Terry; Koletsi, Despina; Kontoyiannis, Dimitrios; Kuhl, Ellen; La Vecchia, Carlo; Lallukka, Tea; Lambris, John; Levitt, Michael; Makridakis, Spyros; Maltezou, Helena; Manzoli, Lamberto; Marusic, Ana; Mavragani, Clio; Moher, David; Mol, Ben; Muka, Taulant; Naudet, Florian; Noble, Paul; Nordström, Anna; Nordström, Peter; Pandis, Nikolaos; Papatheodorou, Stefania; Patel, Chirag; Petersen, Irene; Pilz, Stefan; Plesnila, Nikolaus; Ponsonby, Anne-Louise; Rivas, Manuel; Saltelli, Andrea; Schabus, Manuel; Schippers, Michaéla; Schünemann, Holger; Solmi, Marco; Stang, Andreas; Streeck, Hendrik; Sturmberg, Joachim; Thabane, Lehana; Thombs, Brett; Tsakris, Athanasios; Wood, Simon; Ioannidis, John P.A.
Contributors: Stanford University; University of Bergen (UiB); Uppsala University; University College of London London (UCL); Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Baltimore; Johns Hopkins University (JHU); Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM); Boston University Boston (BU); Stanford School of Medicine Stanford; Stanford Medicine; Stanford University-Stanford University; Harvard Medical School Boston (HMS); Canberra Hospital; University of Technology Sydney (UTS); Department of Paediatrics Melbourne; Melbourne Medical School Melbourne; Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences Melbourne; University of Melbourne-University of Melbourne-Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences Melbourne; University of Melbourne-University of Melbourne; Medical University of South Carolina Charleston (MUSC); Université de Bâle = University of Basel = Basel Universität (Unibas); Università degli Studi di Ferrara = University of Ferrara (UniFE); McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario; University of Pennsylvania; Bond University Gold Coast; University of Alberta; University of Manitoba Winnipeg; Universität Zürich Zürich = University of Zurich (UZH); The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston; Università degli Studi di Milano = University of Milan (UNIMI); Department of Public Health Helsinki; Faculty of Medecine Helsinki; Helsingin yliopisto = Helsingfors universitet = University of Helsinki-Helsingin yliopisto = Helsingfors universitet = University of Helsinki; Perelman School of Medicine; University of Cyprus Nicosia (UCY); University of Split; National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (NKUA); Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Ottawa (OHRI); Monash University Clayton; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes CHU Rennes = Rennes University Hospital Pontchaillou; Centre d'Investigation Clinique Rennes (CIC); Université de Rennes (UR)-Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes CHU Rennes = Rennes University Hospital Pontchaillou -Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM); Institut de recherche en santé, environnement et travail (Irset); Université d'Angers (UA)-Université de Rennes (UR)-École des Hautes Études en Santé Publique EHESP (EHESP)-Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Structure Fédérative de Recherche en Biologie et Santé de Rennes (Biosit : Biologie - Santé - Innovation Technologique); Cedars-Sinai Medical Center; Umeå University = Umeå Universitet; The Arctic University of Norway Tromsø, Norway (UiT); Universität Bern = University of Bern = Université de Berne (UNIBE); Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; Medical University of Graz = Medizinische Universität Graz; Ludwig Maximilian University Munich = Ludwig Maximilians Universität München (LMU); University of Melbourne; University of Salzburg; Erasmus University Rotterdam; University of Ottawa Ottawa; University Hospital Essen (AöR); Universität Bonn = University of Bonn; University of Newcastle Callaghan, Australia (UoN); McGill University = Université McGill Montréal, Canada; University of Athens Medical School Athens; University of Edinburgh (Edin.)
Source: ISSN: 0895-4356.
Publisher Information: HAL CCSD; Elsevier
Publication Year: 2024
Collection: Université de Rennes 1: Publications scientifiques (HAL)
Subject Terms: Competing interests; Consensus statements; Evidence based medicine; Guidelines; Panel bias; Transparency; [SDV.SPEE]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologie
Description: International audience ; Consensus statements can be very influential in medicine and public health. Some of these statements use systematic evidence synthesis but others fail on this front. Many consensus statements use panels of experts to deduce perceived consensus through Delphi processes. We argue that stacking of panel members toward one particular position or narrative is a major threat, especially in absence of systematic evidence review. Stacking may involve financial conflicts of interest, but nonfinancial conflicts of strong advocacy can also cause major bias. Given their emerging importance, we describe here how such consensus statements may be misleading, by analyzing in depth a recent high-impact Delphi consensus statement on COVID-19 recommendations as a case example. We demonstrate that many of the selected panel members and at least 35% of the core panel members had advocated toward COVID-19 elimination (Zero-COVID) during the pandemic and were leading members of aggressive advocacy groups. These advocacy conflicts were not declared in the Delphi consensus publication, with rare exceptions. Therefore, we propose that consensus statements should always require rigorous evidence synthesis and maximal transparency on potential biases toward advocacy or lobbyist groups to be valid. While advocacy can have many important functions, its biased impact on consensus panels should be carefully avoided.
Document Type: article in journal/newspaper
Language: English
Relation: info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/38897481; PUBMED: 38897481
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111428
Availability: https://univ-rennes.hal.science/hal-04652737; https://univ-rennes.hal.science/hal-04652737v1/document; https://univ-rennes.hal.science/hal-04652737v1/file/Kepp%20et%20al.%20-%202024%20-%20Panel%20stacking%20is%20a%20threat%20to%20consensus%20statement%20validity.pdf; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111428
Rights: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/
Accession Number: edsbas.6601044F
Database: BASE