Single-preference consensus measures based on models of ecological evenness

We investigate the relationship between consensus measures used in different settings depending on how voters or experts express their preferences. We propose some new models for single-preference voting, which we derive from the evenness concept in ecology, and show that some of these can be placed within the framework of existing consensus measures using the discrete distance. Finally, we suggest some generalizations of the single-preference consensus measures allowing the incorporation of more general notions of distance.

Aggregating fuzzy implications to measure group consensus

We approach the problem of measuring consensus for a set of real inputs by aggregating the fuzzy implication degrees between each pair of inputs. We compare our operator with existing consensus measures in terms of their satisfaction of desirable properties. The appeal of such an approach lies in the interpretability and flexibility that results from component-wise construction which we modeled on the Bonferroni mean. We also outline some intentions for future research.

Can indices of ecological evenness be used to measure consensus?

In the context of group decision making with fuzzy preferences, consensus measures are employed to provide feedback and help guide automatic or semi-automatic decision reaching processes. These measures attempt to capture the intuitive notion of how much inputs, individuals or groups agree with one another. Meanwhile, in ecological studies there has been an ongoing research effort to define measures of community evenness based on how evenly the proportional abundances of species are distributed. The question hence arises as to whether there can be any cross-fertilization from developments in these fields given their intuitive similarity. Here we investigate some of the models used in ecology toward their potential use in measuring consensus. We found that although many consensus characteristics are exhibited by evenness indices, lack of reciprocity and a tendency towards a minimum when a single input is non-zero would make them undesirable for inputs expressed on an interval scale. On the other hand, we note that some of the general frameworks could still be useful for other types of inputs like ranking profiles and that in the opposite direction consensus measures have the potential to provide new insights in ecology.

Unifying approaches to consensus across different preference representations

© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Consensus measures can be useful in group decision making problems both to guide users toward more reasonable judgments and to give an overall indication of the support for the final decision. The level of consensus between decision makers can be measured in contexts where preferences over alternatives are expressed either as evaluations or scores, pairwise preferences, and weak orders, however these different representations often call for different approaches to consensus measurements. In this paper, we look at the distance metrics used to construct consensus measures in each of these settings and how consistent these are for preference profiles when they are converted from one representation to another. We develop some methods for consistent approaches across decision making settings and provide an example to help investigate differences between some of the commonly used distances.

Desigualdad económica y poder en México

Incluye Bibliografía

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.

Consensus guidelines for implementation of quality processes to prevent invasive fungal disease and enhanced surveillance measures during hospital building works, 2014

Healthcare-associated fungal outbreaks impose a substantial economic burden on the health system and typically result in high patient morbidity and mortality, particularly in the immunocompromised host. As the population at risk of invasive fungal infection continues to grow due to the increased burden of cancer and related factors, the need for hospitals to employ preventative measures has become increasingly important. These guidelines outline the standard quality processes hospitals need to accommodate into everyday practice and at times of healthcare-associated outbreak, including the role of antifungal stewardship programmes and best practice environmental sampling. Specific recommendations are also provided to help guide the planning and implementation of quality processes and enhanced surveillance before, during and after high-risk activities, such as hospital building works. Areas in which information is still lacking and further research is required are also highlighted.

Towards global consensus on outcome measures for atopic eczema research: results of the HOME II meeting

The use of nonstandardized and inadequately validated outcome measures in atopic eczema trials is a major obstacle to practising evidence-based dermatology. The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative is an international multiprofessional group dedicated to atopic eczema outcomes research. In June 2011, the HOME initiative conducted a consensus study involving 43 individuals from 10 countries, representing different stakeholders (patients, clinicians, methodologists, pharmaceutical industry) to determine core outcome domains for atopic eczema trials, to define quality criteria for atopic eczema outcome measures and to prioritize topics for atopic eczema outcomes research. Delegates were given evidence-based information, followed by structured group discussion and anonymous consensus voting. Consensus was achieved to include clinical signs, symptoms, long-term control of flares and quality of life into the core set of outcome domains for atopic eczema trials. The HOME initiative strongly recommends including and reporting these core outcome domains as primary or secondary endpoints in all future atopic eczema trials. Measures of these core outcome domains need to be valid, sensitive to change and feasible. Prioritized topics of the HOME initiative are the identification/development of the most appropriate instruments for the four core outcome domains. HOME is open to anyone with an interest in atopic eczema outcomes research.

Emergency department crowding: prioritising quantified crowding measures using a Delphi study.

AimsEmergency department (ED) crowding has been associated with a number of negative health outcomes, including unnecessary deaths, increased waiting times and a decrease in care quality. Despite the seriousness of this issue, there is little agreement on appropriate crowding measures to assess crowding effects on ED operations. The objective of this study was to prioritise a list of quantified crowding measures that would assess the current state of a department.MethodsA three round Delphi study was conducted via email and an Internet based survey tool. The panel consisted of 40 professionals who had exposure to and expertise in crowding. Participants submitted quantified crowding measures which, through three rounds, were evaluated and ranked to assess participant agreement for inclusion.ResultsThe panel identified 27 measures of which eight (29.6%) reached consensus at the end of the study. These measures comprised: (1) ability of ambulances to offload; (2) patients who leave without being seen or treated; (3) time until triage; (4) ED occupancy rate; (5) patients' total length of stay in the ED; (6) time to see a physician; (7) ED boarding time; and (8) number of patients boarding in the ED.ConclusionsThis study resulted in the identification of eight quantified crowding measures, which present a comprehensive view of how crowding is affecting ED operations, and highlighted areas of concern. These quantified measures have the potential to make a considerable contribution to decision making by ED management and to provide a basis for learning across different departments.