IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v16y2018i6d10.1007_s40258-018-0415-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of Expert Judgement Across NICE Guidance-Making Programmes: A Review of Current Processes and Suitability of Existing Tools to Support the Use of Expert Elicitation

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Peel

    (University of York)

  • Michelle Jenks

    (University of York)

  • Moni Choudhury

    (National Institute of Health and Care Excellence)

  • Rosemary Lovett

    (National Institute of Health and Care Excellence)

  • Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla

    (National Institute of Health and Care Excellence)

  • Andrew Sims

    (Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Freeman Hospital
    University of Newcastle upon Tyne)

  • Joyce Craig

    (University of York)

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to review current use of experts within National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance-making programmes, identify improvements in use of expert judgement, and to assess tools and protocols to support the elicitation of information from experts for use by NICE. Methods The study comprised a review of NICE process guides; semi-structured interviews with individuals representing each NICE guidance-making programme and a comparison of the suitability of currently available tools and protocols for expert elicitation to the requirements of NICE programmes. Results Information elicited from experts and the way in which it is used varies across NICE guidance-making programmes. Experts’ involvement can be as intensive as being a member of a committee and thus having direct influence on recommendations or limited one-off consultations on specific parameters. We identified 16 tools for expert elicitation that were potentially relevant. None fully met the requirements of NICE, although an existing tool could be potentially adapted. Ongoing research to develop a reference protocol for expert elicitation in healthcare decision making may be of use in future. Conclusions NICE uses expert judgement across all its guidance-making programmes, but its uses vary considerably. There is no currently available tool for expert elicitation suitable for use by NICE. However, adaptation of an existing tool or ongoing research in the area could address this in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Peel & Michelle Jenks & Moni Choudhury & Rosemary Lovett & Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla & Andrew Sims & Joyce Craig, 2018. "Use of Expert Judgement Across NICE Guidance-Making Programmes: A Review of Current Processes and Suitability of Existing Tools to Support the Use of Expert Elicitation," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 819-836, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:16:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-018-0415-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-018-0415-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-018-0415-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-018-0415-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandra Hoffmann & Paul Fischbeck & Alan Krupnick & Michael McWilliams, 2007. "Elicitation from Large, Heterogeneous Expert Panels: Using Multiple Uncertainty Measures to Characterize Information Quality for Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 91-109, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert F. Bordley, 2009. "Combining the Opinions of Experts Who Partition Events Differently," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 38-46, March.
    2. Laura M. Keating & Lea Randall & Rebecca Stanton & Casey McCormack & Michael Lucid & Travis Seaborn & Sarah J. Converse & Stefano Canessa & Axel Moehrenschlager, 2023. "Using Decision Analysis to Determine the Feasibility of a Conservation Translocation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 295-310, December.
    3. L. Robin Keller & Kelly M. Kophazi, 2008. "From the Editors..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 57-59, June.
    4. Rakesh K. Sarin, 2013. "From the Editor —Optimal Betting, Reducing Unnecessary Mammography in Breast Cancer Diagnosis, Product Line Design, and Value of Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 187-188, September.
    5. L. Robin Keller, 2009. "From the Editor..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-3, March.
    6. Kesten Green & J. Scott Armstrong & Andreas Graefe, 2007. "Methods to Elicit Forecasts from Groups: Delphi and Prediction Markets Compared," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 8, pages 17-20, Fall.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:16:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-018-0415-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.