Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jan 31;20(859):230-234.
doi: 10.53738/REVMED.2024.20.859.230.

[Scientific consensus-building to promote the link between science and public policy]

[Article in French]
Affiliations

[Scientific consensus-building to promote the link between science and public policy]

[Article in French]
Camille Velarde Crézé et al. Rev Med Suisse. .

Abstract

Consensus, defined as the position on which most scientists specialized in a given field agree at a given time, is a key aspect in increasing the readability, credibility and, ultimately, the use of scientific knowledge in public (evidence-based health policy). This article presents several methods aiming at developing scientific consensus between experts, such as the conventional or rapid Delphi approach, the nominal group technique, the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method and the consensus development conference. These methods are used to synthesize expert judgements when uncertainties persist in the literature - each with its own specificities in terms of duration, number of steps and expert participants enlisted, as well as the ways in which they are involved.

Le consensus, défini comme la position sur laquelle la plupart des scientifiques spécialistes d’un domaine se mettent d’accord à un moment donné, est un aspect-clé pour augmenter la lisibilité, la crédibilité et in fine l’utilisation des savoirs scientifiques dans les politiques publiques (evidence-based health policy). Cet article présente plusieurs méthodes permettant le développement de consensus entre personnes expertes, telles que l’approche Delphi conventionnelle ou rapide, la technique du groupe nominal, la méthode d’adéquation RAND-UCLA et la conférence de consensus. Ces méthodes permettent la synthèse des jugements experts lorsque des incertitudes persistent dans la littérature – chacune avec des spécificités en termes de durée, du nombre d’étapes et de personnes expertes sollicitées, ainsi que des modalités de leur implication.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Les auteurs n’ont déclaré aucun conflit d’intérêts en relation avec cet article.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources