Is the jury out on consensus opinion?

Anaesthesia

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 256-260

  McLintic, A J ^a   Irwin, M G ^b  

^a MIDDLEMORE HOSPITAL   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; INTUITION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROBLEM SOLVING; PRODUCTIVITY; REVIEW; WORKPLACE; ANESTHESIOLOGY; COOPERATION; GROUP PROCESS;

ANESTHESIOLOGY; CONSENSUS; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; GROUP PROCESSES; HUMANS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 84959191976     PISSN: 00032409     EISSN: 13652044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/anae.13341     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Lee DH, Vielemeyer O,. Analysis of overall level of evidence behind Infectious Diseases Society of America practice guidelines. Archives of Internal Medicine 2011; 171: 18-22.
2. Grant RW, Kirkman MS,. Trends in the evidence level for the American Diabetes Association's "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" from 2005 to 2014. Diabetes Care 2015; 38: 6.
3. Sutherland NS,. Irrationality. London: Pinter and Martin, 2007.
4. Weiss DJ, Shanteau J,. The vice of consensus and the virtue of consistency. In:, Smith K, Shanteau D, Johnson P, eds. Psychological Investigations of Competent Decision Making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004: 226-40.
5. Goldman A,. Experts: which ones should you trust? In:, Selinger E, Crease RP, eds. The Philosophy of Expertise. New York; Chichester: Columbia University Press, 2006: 14-39.
6. Einhorn H,. Expert judgment: some necessary conditions and an example. Journal of Applied Psychology 1974; 59: 562-71.
7. Cicchetti D,. The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: a cross disciplinary investigation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1991; 14: 119-86.
8. Shanteau J, Weiss DJ, Thomas RP, Pounds JC,. Performance-based assessment of expertise: How to decide if someone is an expert or not. European Journal of Operational Research. 2000; 136: 253-63.
9. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists. Committees and roles. http://www.anzca.edu.au/about-anzca/council-committees-and-representatives/Committees (accessed 04/04/2015).
10. Royal College of Anaesthetists. Boards, committees and working groups. http://www.rcoa.ac.uk/structure-organisation-and-regulations/boards-committees-and-working-groups (accessed 04/04/2015).
11. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland. Committees. http://www.aagbi.org/about-us/committees (accessed 27/06 2015).
12. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland. Safety guideline: skin antisepsis for central neuraxial blockade. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 1279-86.
13. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland. Safety guideline: reducing the risk from cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture 2015. Anaesthesia 2015; 70: 623-6.
14. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland. Peri-operative management of the obese surgical patient 2015. Anaesthesia 2015; 70: 859-76.
15. Kuhn TS,. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1962.
16. Naylor CD, Basinski A, Baigrie RS, Goldman BS, Lomas J,. Placing patients in the queue for coronary revascularization: evidence for practice variations from an expert panel process. American Journal of Public Health 1990; 80: 1246-52.
17. Kung J, Miller RR, Mackowiak PA,. Failure of clinical practice guidelines to meet institute of medicine standards: two more decades of little, if any, progress. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012; 172: 1628-33.
18. Jenkings KN, Barber N,. What constitutes evidence in hospital new drug decision making? Social Science and Medicine 2004; 58: 1757-66.
19. Plous S,. The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.
20. Janis IL,. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, 2nd edn. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1983.
21. Asch SE,. Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American 1955; 193: 31-5.
22. Berns GS, Chappelow J, Zink CF, Pagnoni G, Martin-Skurski ME, Richards J,. Neurobiological correlates of social conformity and independence during mental rotation. Biological Psychiatry 2005; 58: 245-53.
23. Murphy MK, Black NA, Lamping DL, et al., Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technology Assessment 1998; 2: 1-88.
24. Muir R,. Pros and cons of decision-making by committee. Findlaw Practice Guide. http://practice.findlaw.com/practice-guide/pros-and-cons-of-decision-making-by-committee.html (accessed 5/04/ 2015).
25. Hastie R,. Experimental evidence on group accuracy. In:, Grofman B, Owen G, eds. Information Pooling and Group Decision Making: Proceedings of the Second University of California, Irvine, Conference on Political Economy. Greenwich: JAI Press, 1986: 129-57.
26. Hill GW,. Group versus individual performance: are N + 1 heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin 1982; 91: 517-39.
27. Sniezek JA,. An examination of group process in judgmental forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting 1989; 5: 171-8.
28. Furnham A,. The brainstorming myth. Business Strategy Review 2000; 11: 21-8.
29. Stroebe W, Diehl M,. Why groups are less effective than their members: on productivity losses in idea-generating groups. European Review of Social Psychology 1994; 5: 271-303.
30. Pinsonneault A, Barki H, Gallupe RB, Hoppen N,. Electronic brainstorming: the illusion of productivity. Information Systems Research 1999; 10: 110-33.
31. Paulus PB, Dzindolet MT, Poletes G, Camacho LM,. Perception of performance in group brainstorming: the illusion of group productivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1993; 19: 78-89.
32. Paulus PB, Larey TS, Ortega AH,. Performance and perceptions of brainstormers in an organizational setting. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 1995; 17: 249-65.
33. Karau SJ, Williams KD,. Social loafing: a meta- analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1993; 65: 681-706.
34. Jackson JM, Harkins SG,. Equity in effort: an explanation of the social loafing effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1985; 49: 1199-206.
35. Carr PB, Walton GM,. Cues of working together fuel intrinsic motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2014; 53: 169-84.
36. Cain S,. Quiet: the Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking, 1st paperback edn. New York: Broadway Paperbacks, 2013.
37. Shaneyfelt TM, Mayo-Smith MF, Rothwangl J,. Are guidelines following guidelines? The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines in the peer-reviewed medical literature. Journal of the American Medical Association 1999; 281: 1900-5.
38. Graham R,. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2011.
39. Shaneyfelt T,. In guidelines we cannot trust. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012; 172: 1633-4.
40. Lenzer J,. Why we can't trust clinical guidelines. British Medical Journal 2013; 346: f3830.
41. Shaneyfelt TM, Centor RM,. Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines: go gently into that good night. Journal of the American Medical Association 2009; 301: 868-9.
42. Hurwitz B,. Legal and political considerations of clinical practice guidelines. British Medical Journal 1999; 318: 661-4.