The Library
The ghost in the machine? : the value of expert advice in the production of evidence-based guidance : a mixed methods study of the NICE Interventional Procedures Programme
Tools
Tools
Tools
Oyebode, Oyinlola, Patrick, Hannah, Walker, Alexander, Campbell, Bruce and Powell, John (2016) The ghost in the machine? : the value of expert advice in the production of evidence-based guidance : a mixed methods study of the NICE Interventional Procedures Programme. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 32 (1-2). pp. 61-68. doi:10.1017/S0266462315000690
|
PDF
WRAP_Specialist advice IJTAHC 9th Feb 2015 Clean Copy.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer. Download (631Kb) | Preview |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462315000690
Abstract
Objectives:
The aim of this study was to determine the aspects of expert advice that decision makers find most useful in the development of evidence-based guidance and to identify the characteristics of experts providing the most useful advice.
Methods:
First, semi-structured interviews were conducted with seventeen members of the Interventional Procedures Advisory Committee of the UK's National Institute of Health and Care Excellence. Interviews examined the usefulness of expert advice during guidance development. Transcripts were analyzed inductively to identify themes. Second, data were extracted from 211 experts’ questionnaires for forty-one consecutive procedures. Usefulness of advice was scored using an index developed through the qualitative work. Associations between usefulness score and characteristics of the expert advisor were investigated using univariate and multivariate analyses.
Results:
Expert opinion was seen as a valued complement to empirical evidence, providing context and tacit knowledge unavailable in published literature, but helpful for interpreting it. Interviewees also valued advice on the training and experience required to perform a procedure, on patient selection criteria and the place of a procedure within a clinical management pathway. Limitations of bias in expert opinion were widely acknowledged and skepticism expressed regarding the anecdotal nature of advice on safety or efficacy outcomes. Quantitative analysis demonstrated that the most useful advice was given by clinical experts with direct personal experience of the procedure, particularly research experience.
Conclusions:
Evidence-based guidance production is often characterized as a rational, pipeline process. This ignores the valuable role that expert opinion plays in guidance development, complementing and supporting the interpretation of empirical data.
| Item Type: | Journal Article | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subjects: | R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine | ||||
| Divisions: | Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School | ||||
| Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): | Evidence-based medicine | ||||
| Journal or Publication Title: | International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care | ||||
| Publisher: | Cambridge University Press | ||||
| ISSN: | 0266-4623 | ||||
| Official Date: | 22 March 2016 | ||||
| Dates: |
|
||||
| Date of first compliant deposit: | 6 April 2016 | ||||
| Volume: | 32 | ||||
| Number: | 1-2 | ||||
| Number of Pages: | 8 | ||||
| Page Range: | pp. 61-68 | ||||
| DOI: | 10.1017/S0266462315000690 | ||||
| Status: | Peer Reviewed | ||||
| Publication Status: | Published | ||||
| Access rights to Published version: | Restricted or Subscription Access | ||||
| Funder: | National Institute for Clinical Excellence (Great Britain) (NICE) |
Request changes or add full text files to a record
Repository staff actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
