Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T05:01:13.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decision Analysis as a Synthetic Tool for Achieving Consensus in Technology Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Stephen G. Pauker
Stephen G. Pauker
Affiliation:
Tufts University School of Medicine
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Over the past decade the Office of Medical Application of Research (OMAR) of the National Institutes of Health has developed the consensus development conference (18) to assess technologies in cases where the scientific community has been unable, or unwilling, to reach a firm position as to efficacy but which require some better form of assessment than expert opinion (8). Another paper in this issue describes the principles that underlie such conferences (9).

Type
Technology Assessment: Policy, Clinical, and Methodological Issues
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , January 1986 , pp. 83 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Barza, M., & Pauker, S. G.The decision to biopsy, treat or wait in suspected herpes encephalitis. Annals of Internal Medicine, 1980, 92, 641–649.Google Scholar
2.Beck, J. R., & Pauker, S. G.The Markov process in medical prognosis. Medical Decision Making, 1983, 3, 419–458.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Detsky, A. S. What's wrong with decision analysis? Presented at 6th annual meeting of Society of Medical Decision Making, Asilomar, California, October 21–23, 1985.Google Scholar
4.Eckman, M. E., Sonnenberg, F. A., Jacoby, I., & Pauker, S. G. An analysis of strategies for the establishment of HLA donor registries from bone marrow transplants. Presented at 6th annual meeting of Society of Medical Decision Making, Asilomar, California, October 21–23, 1985.Google Scholar
5.Eddy, D. M.Screening for cancer: Theory, analysis, and design. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1980.Google Scholar
6.Gottlieb, J. E., & Pauker, S. G.Whether or not to administer Amphotericin B to an immunosuppressed patient with hematologic malignancy and undiagnosed fever. Medical Decision Making, 1981, 1, 75–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Hillner, B. E., Hollenberg, J. P., & Pauker, S. G.Estrogens in post-menopausal women: Speculations on the effects of starting age and long-term efficacy. Clinical Research, 1985, 33, 253A.Google Scholar
8.Jacoby, I.Biomedical technology: Information, Dissemination and the NIH Consensus Development Process. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1983, 5, 245–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Jacoby, I., & Rose, M.Transfer of information and its impact on medical practice: The U.S. experience. International Journal of Technology Assessment, this issue, pp. 107–115.Google Scholar
10.Kassirer, J. P.The principles of clinical decision making: An introduction to decision analysis. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 1976, 49, 149–164.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Lau, J., Frigoletto, F., McNeil, B. J., Zarin, D. A., & Pauker, S. G.Diagnostic ultrasound in prenatal screening for congenital anomalies. Medical Decision Making, 1984, 4, 545.Google Scholar
12.Levey, A. S., Pauker, S. G., & Kassirer, J. P.Occult intracranial aneurysms in polycystic kidney disease: When is cerebral arteriography indicated? New England Journal of Medicine, 1983, 308, 986–994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Lusted, L. B.Medical decision making. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1968.Google Scholar
14.McNeil, B. J., & Carvalho, E.Critical issues in medical technology. Boston: Auburn House, 1982.Google Scholar
15.McNeil, B. J., & Pauker, S. G.Decision analysis for public health: Principles and illustrations. Annual Review of Public Health, 1984, 5, 135–161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Moskowitz, A. J., & Pauker, S. G.A decision analytic approach to limb-sparing treatment for adult soft tissue and osteogenic sarcoma. Cancer Treatment Symposia (in press).Google Scholar
17.Neustadt, R. E., & Fineberg, H. V.The Swine Flu Affair: Decision Making on a Slippery Disease. Washington: U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare, 1978.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Office of Medical Applications of Research, NIH. Guidelines for the selection and management of consensus development conferences. Bethesda, Md., 1983.Google Scholar
19.Pauker, S. G.Coronary artery surgery: the use of decision analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine, 1976, 85, 8–18.Google Scholar
20.Pauker, S. G., & Kassirer, J. P.Decision analysis by personal computer. Archives of Internal Medicine, 1981, 141, 1831–1837.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Pliskin, J. S., & Beck, C. H.Decision analysis in individual clinical decision making: a real world application in treatment of renal disease. Methods of Information in Medicine, 1976, 15, 43–46.Google ScholarPubMed
22.Raiffa, H.Decision Analysis. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1968.Google Scholar
23.Schwartz, W. B., Gorry, G. A., Kassirer, J. P., & Essig, A.Decision analysis and clinical judgment. American Journal of Medicine, 1973, 55, 459–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Van Citters, R. L., Bauer, C, Christopherson, L. K., Eberhart, R., Eddy, D. M., Frye, R. L., Jonsen, A., Keller, K., Levine, R. J., McGoon, D. C, Pauker, S. G., Rackley, C. E., Willman, V. L., & Frommer, P. L. (The Working Group on Mechanical Circulatory Support of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute). Artificial Heart and Assist Devices: Directions, Needs, Costs, Societal and Ethical Issues. Bethesda, Md.Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 05 1985.Google Scholar
25.Weinstein, M. C, Fineberg, H. V., McNeil, B. J. et al. , Clinical Decision Analysis. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1980.Google Scholar
26.Weinstein, M. C.Estrogens use in post-menopausal women: costs, risks and benefits. New England Journal of Medicine, 1980, 303, 308–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Zarin, D. A., Plante, D. A., Kassirer, J. P. & Pauker, S. G.Experience with a consultative service in clinical decision making. Medical Decision Making, 1983, 3, 371.Google Scholar