Abstract
- Overdiagnosis challenges the social contract that underpins healthcare, and community voices are often missing from the relevant policy discussions
- Citizens’ juries elicit the voices, values, and preferences of informed citizens who are presented with evidence based expert views
- Jurors deliberate the evidence among themselves before formulating their opinions and recommendations
- Citizens’ juries can elucidate public values that can then be used to inform policies and practices to manage the risks of overdiagnosis
- The findings can contribute to guideline development and proposed changes to disease thresholds
- The process of citizens’ juries align with the basic tenets of evidence based medicine and can broaden and improve the dialogue around medical uncertainty
| Language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | l351 |
| Journal | BMJ (Online) |
| Volume | 364 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 30 Jan 2019 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Citizens' juries can bring public voices on overdiagnosis into policy making. / Degeling, Chris; Thomas, Rae; Rychetnik, Lucie.
In: BMJ (Online), Vol. 364, l351, 30.01.2019.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Citizens' juries can bring public voices on overdiagnosis into policy making
AU - Degeling, Chris
AU - Thomas, Rae
AU - Rychetnik, Lucie
PY - 2019/1/30
Y1 - 2019/1/30
N2 - Key messages- Overdiagnosis challenges the social contract that underpins healthcare, and community voices are often missing from the relevant policy discussions- Citizens’ juries elicit the voices, values, and preferences of informed citizens who are presented with evidence based expert views- Jurors deliberate the evidence among themselves before formulating their opinions and recommendations- Citizens’ juries can elucidate public values that can then be used to inform policies and practices to manage the risks of overdiagnosis- The findings can contribute to guideline development and proposed changes to disease thresholds- The process of citizens’ juries align with the basic tenets of evidence based medicine and can broaden and improve the dialogue around medical uncertainty
AB - Key messages- Overdiagnosis challenges the social contract that underpins healthcare, and community voices are often missing from the relevant policy discussions- Citizens’ juries elicit the voices, values, and preferences of informed citizens who are presented with evidence based expert views- Jurors deliberate the evidence among themselves before formulating their opinions and recommendations- Citizens’ juries can elucidate public values that can then be used to inform policies and practices to manage the risks of overdiagnosis- The findings can contribute to guideline development and proposed changes to disease thresholds- The process of citizens’ juries align with the basic tenets of evidence based medicine and can broaden and improve the dialogue around medical uncertainty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060853887&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bmj.l351
DO - 10.1136/bmj.l351
M3 - Article
VL - 364
JO - BMJ (Clinical research ed.)
T2 - BMJ (Clinical research ed.)
JF - BMJ (Clinical research ed.)
SN - 0959-535X
M1 - l351
ER -