Consensus in organizations:Hunting for the social choice conundrum in APA elections

According to the axiomatic literature on consensus methods, the best collective choice by one method of preference aggregation can easily be the worst by another. Are award committees, electorates, managers, online retailers, and web-based recommender systems stuck with an impossibility of rational preference aggregation? We investigate this social choice conundrum for seven social choice methods: Condorcet, Borda, Plurality, Antiplurality, the Single Transferable Vote, Coombs, and Plurality Runoff. We rely on Monte Carlo simulations for theoretical results and on twelve ballot datasets from American Psychological Association (APA) presidential elections for empirical results. Each of these elections provides partial rankings of five candidates from about 13,000 to about 20,000 voters. APA preferences are neither domain-restricted nor generated by an Impartial Culture. We find virtually no trace of a Condorcet paradox. In direct contrast with the classical social choice conundrum, competing consensus methods agree remarkably well, especially on the overall best and worst options. The agreement is also robust under perturbations of the preference prole via resampling, even in relatively small pseudosamples. We also explore prescriptive implications of our findings.

Defining consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe using Delphi methods: A White Paper from the European Association of Palliative care

Background: People with intellectual disabilities often present with unique challenges that make it more difficult to meet their
palliative care needs.
Aim: To define consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe.
Design: Delphi study in four rounds: (1) a taskforce of 12 experts from seven European countries drafted the norms, based on available empirical knowledge and regional/national guidelines; (2) using an online survey, 34 experts from 18 European countries evaluated the draft norms, provided feedback and distributed the survey within their professional networks. Criteria for consensus
were clearly defined; (3) modifications and recommendations were made by the taskforce; and (4) the European Association for
Palliative Care reviewed and approved the final version.
Setting and participants: Taskforce members: identified through international networking strategies. Expert panel: a purposive sample identified through taskforce members’ networks.
Results: A total of 80 experts from 15 European countries evaluated 52 items within the following 13 norms: equity of access, communication, recognising the need for palliative care, assessment of total needs, symptom management, end-of-life decision making, involving those who matter, collaboration, support for family/carers, preparing for death, bereavement support, education/training
and developing/managing services. None of the items scored less than 86% agreement, making a further round unnecessary. In light of respondents’ comments, several items were modified and one item was deleted.
Conclusion: This White Paper presents the first guidance for clinical practice, policy and research related to palliative care for people with intellectual disabilities based on evidence and European consensus, setting a benchmark for changes in policy and practice.

Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies

Mollusks are the most morphologically disparate living animal phylum, they have diversified into all habitats, and have a deep fossil record. Monophyly and identity of their eight living classes is undisputed, but relationships between these groups and patterns of their early radiation have remained elusive. Arguments about traditional morphological phylogeny focus on a small number of topological concepts but often without regard to proximity of the individual classes. In contrast, molecular studies have proposed a number of radically different, inherently contradictory, and controversial sister relationships. Here, we assembled a dataset of 42 unique published trees describing molluscan interrelationships. We used these data to ask several questions about the state of resolution of molluscan phylogeny compared to a null model of the variation possible in random trees constructed from a monophyletic assemblage of eight terminals. Although 27 different unique trees have been proposed from morphological inference, the majority of these are not statistically different from each other. Within the available molecular topologies, only four studies to date have included the deep-sea class Monoplacophora; but 36.4% of all trees are not significantly different. We also present supertrees derived from 2 data partitions and 3 methods, including all available molecular molluscan phylogenies, which will form the basis for future hypothesis testing. The supertrees presented here were not constructed to provide yet another hypothesis of molluscan relationships, but rather to algorithmically evaluate the relationships present in the disparate published topologies. Based on the totality of available evidence, certain patterns of relatedness among constituent taxa become clear. The internodal distance is consistently short between a few taxon pairs, particularly supporting the relatedness of Monoplacophora and the chitons, Polyplacophora. Other taxon pairs are rarely or never found in close proximity, such as the vermiform Caudofoveata and Bivalvia. Our results have specific utility for guiding constructive research planning in order to better test relationships in Mollusca as well as other problematic groups. Taxa with consistently proximate relationships should be the focus of a combined approach in a concerted assessment of potential genetic and anatomical homology, while unequivocally distant taxa will make the most constructive choices for exemplar selection in higher-level phylogenomic analyses.

BOB CAT: a Large-Scale Review and Delphi Consensus for Management of Barrett’s Esophagus With No Dysplasia, Indefinite for, or Low-Grade Dysplasia

OBJECTIVES: Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD). METHODS: We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. RESULTS: In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.

Consensus on Outcome Measures for Glaucoma Effectiveness Trials: Results From a Delphi and Nominal Group Technique Approaches

PURPOSE: Comparing the relative effectiveness of interventions across glaucoma trials can be problematic due to differences in definitions of outcomes. We sought to identify a key set of clinical outcomes and reach consensus on how best to measure them from the perspective of glaucoma experts.

METHODS: A 2-round electronic Delphi survey was conducted. Round 1 involved 25 items identified from a systematic review. Round 2 was developed based on information gathered in round 1. A 10-point Likert scale was used to quantify importance and consensus of outcomes (7 outcomes) and ways of measuring them (44 measures). Experts were identified through 2 glaucoma societies membership-the UK and Eire Glaucoma Society and the European Glaucoma Society. A Nominal Group Technique (NGT) followed the Delphi process. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS: A total of 65 participants completed round 1 out of 320; of whom 56 completed round 2 (86%). Agreement on the importance of outcomes was reached on 48/51 items (94%). Intraocular pressure (IOP), visual field (VF), safety, and anatomic outcomes were classified as highly important. Regarding methods of measurement of IOP, "mean follow-up IOP" using Goldmann applanation tonometry achieved the highest importance, whereas for evaluating VFs "global index mean deviation/defect (MD)" and "rate of VF progression" were the most important. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) was identified as highly important. The NGT results reached consensus on "change of IOP (mean of 3 consecutive measurements taken at fixed time of day) from baseline," change of VF-MD values (3 reliable VFs at baseline and follow-up visit) from baseline, and change of RNFL thickness (2 good quality OCT images) from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached among glaucoma experts on how best to measure IOP, VF, and anatomic outcomes in glaucoma randomized controlled trials.

Comparative Assessment of Methods for Measuring Consensual Poverty: Sort Card Versus CAPI

Poverty means more than having a low income and includes exclusion from a minimally accepted way of life. It is now common practice in Europe to measure progress against poverty in terms of low income, material deprivation rates and some combination of both. This makes material deprivation indicators, and their selection, highly significant in its own right. The ‘consensual poverty’ approach is to identify deprivation items which a majority of the population agree constitute life’s basic necessities, accepting that these items will need revised over time to reflect social change. Traditionally, this has been carried out in the UK through specialised poverty surveys using a Sort Card (SC) technique.

Based on analysis of a 2012 omnibus survey, and discussions with three interviewers, this article examines how perception of necessities is affected by mode of administration – SC and Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI). More CAPI respondents scored deprivation items necessary. Greatest disparities are in material items where 25 out of 32 items were significantly higher via CAPI. Closer agreement is found in social participation with 3 out of 14 activities significantly different. Consensus is higher on children’s material deprivation.
We consider influencing variables which could account for the disparities and believe that the SC method produces a more considered response. However, in light of technological advances, we question how long the SC method will remain socially acceptable. This paper concludes that the CAPI method can be easily modified without compromising the benefits of the SC method in capturing thoughtful responses.

Application of self-quenched JH consensus primers for real-time quantitative PCR of IGH gene to minimal residual disease evaluation in multiple myeloma.

Monitoring multiple myeloma patients for relapse requires sensitive methods to measure minimal residual disease and to establish a more precise prognosis. The present study aimed to standardize a real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for the IgH gene with a JH consensus self-quenched fluorescence reverse primer and a VDJH or DJH allele-specific sense primer (self-quenched PCR). This method was compared with allele-specific real-time quantitative PCR test for the IgH gene using a TaqMan probe and a JH consensus primer (TaqMan PCR). We studied nine multiple myeloma patients from the Spanish group treated with the MM2000 therapeutic protocol. Self-quenched PCR demonstrated sensitivity of >or=10(-4) or 16 genomes in most cases, efficiency was 1.71 to 2.14, and intra-assay and interassay reproducibilities were 1.18 and 0.75%, respectively. Sensitivity, efficiency, and residual disease detection were similar with both PCR methods. TaqMan PCR failed in one case because of a mutation in the JH primer binding site, and self-quenched PCR worked well in this case. In conclusion, self-quenched PCR is a sensitive and reproducible method for quantifying residual disease in multiple myeloma patients; it yields similar results to TaqMan PCR and may be more effective than the latter when somatic mutations are present in the JH intronic primer binding site.

UK consensus project on quality in palliative day services: developing a quality indicator set using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method

Introduction
Evaluating quality of palliative day services is essential for assessing care across diverse settings, and for monitoring quality improvement approaches.

Aim
To develop a set of quality indicators for assessment of all aspects (structure, process and outcome) of care in palliative day services.

Methods
Using a modified version of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (Fitch et al., 2001), a multidisciplinary panel of 16 experts independently completed a survey rating the appropriateness of 182 potential quality indicators previously identified during a systematic evidence review. Panel members then attended a one day, face-to-face meeting where indicators were discussed and subsequently re-rated. Panel members were also asked to rate the feasibility and necessity of measuring each indicator.

Results
71 indicators classified as inappropriate during the survey were removed based on median appropriateness ratings and level of agreement. Following the panel discussions, a further 60 were removed based on appropriateness and feasibility ratings, level of agreement and assessment of necessity. Themes identified during the panel discussion and findings of the evidence review were used to translate the remaining 51 indicators into a final set of 27.

Conclusion
The final indicator set included information on rationale and supporting evidence, methods of assessment, risk adjustment, and recommended performance levels. Further implementation work will test the suitability of this ‘toolkit’ for measurement and benchmarking. The final indicator set provides the basis for standardised assessment of quality across services, including care delivered in community and primary care settings.

Reference

• Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User’s Manual. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 2001. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1269

STOPPFrail (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail Adults with Limited Life Expectancy): Consensus Validation

Background: To validate STOPPFrail, a list of explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in frailer older adults with limited life expectancy. A Delphi consensus survey of an expert panel (n = 17) comprising specialists in geriatric medicine, clinical pharmacology, palliative care, psychiatry of old age, clinical pharmacy and general practice.
Methods: STOPPFrail criteria was initially created by the authors based on clinical
experience and appraisal of the available literature. Criteria were organised according to physiological system. Each criterion was accompanied by an explanation. Panellists ranked their agreement with each criterion on a 5-point Likert scale and invited to provide written feedback. Criteria with a median Likert response of 4/5 (agree/strongly agree) and a 25th centile of ≥4 were included in the final criteria.
Results: Three Delphi rounds were required. All panellists completed all rounds. Thirty criteria were proposed for inclusion; 26 were accepted. No new criteria were added. The first two criteria suggest deprescribing medications with no indication or where compliance is poor. The remaining 24 criteria include lipid-lowering therapies, alpha-blockers for hypertension, anti-platelets, neuroleptics, proton pump inhibitors, H-2 receptor antagonists, anti-spasmodics, theophylline, leukotriene antagonists, calcium supplements, bone anti-resorptive therapy, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, non-steroidal antiinflammatories, corticosteroids, 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, alpha-1 selective blockers, muscarinic antagonists, oral diabetic agents, ACE-inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, systemic oestrogens, multivitamins, nutritional supplements and prophylactic antibiotics. Anticoagulants and anti-depressants were excluded. Despite incorporation of panellists’ suggestions, memantine and acetyl-cholinesterase inhibitors remained inconclusive.
Conclusion: STOPPFrail comprises 26 criteria, which have been judged by broad consensus, to be potentially inappropriate in frailer older patients with limited life expectancy. STOPPFrail may assist in deprescribing medications in these patients.