Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 14, 2025

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Criteria For Agreement When Conducting Local Consensus Discussions: A Qualitative Study
Lisa Pagano1, Janet C Long1, Emilie Francis-Auton1
1Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Purpose:
Healthcare is a complex, multi-layered team environment where effective change often requires reaching consensus among relatively autonomous stakeholders. Although conducting informal consensus discussions is a frequently used implementation strategy in real-world clinical settings, limited information exists about what defines consensus when using these methods. Specifying the criteria for consensus is important, as it can shape the design of consensus-building strategies. This study aimed to identify and define the key domains of consensus used in local consensus discussions to standardise healthcare practices.
Patients And Methods:
A qualitative study was conducted in one private hospital in Australia using a modified, grounded theory methodology. Clinical, non-clinical and leadership staff involved in developing standardised perioperative pathways using informal consensus discussions were recruited. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews and naturalistic participant observations between February 2023 and May 2024. Data collection and analysis occurred concurrently until theoretical saturation was achieved. Data were analysed using open coding with constant comparison, focussed and theoretical coding to develop theoretical concepts.
Results:
Sixteen hours of observations with 31 participants and nine semi-structured interviews were conducted. Analysis identified four distinct consensus criteria: i) unanimous consensus, ii) delegated consensus, iii) assumed consensus and iv) concessional consensus. While unanimity was the preferred outcome, other consensus types emerged as viable alternatives when unanimous agreement was challenging to achieve. Each criterion had differing factors and mechanisms which influenced reaching the consensus criterion, underpinning assumptions, and considerations for practice, which formed four domains of consensus.
Conclusion:
These domains provide a structured framework for classifying consensus criteria when conducting local consensus discussions in healthcare. The findings broaden our understanding of consensus in local healthcare discussions, moving beyond a singular focus on unanimity. By clearly defining consensus types, organisations can strategically select consensus methods that best support decision-making and intervention implementation.
More Related Videos
13:44Project-Based Learning Guidelines for Health Sciences Students: An Analysis with Data Mining and Qualitative Techniques
Published on: December 9, 2022
08:53Integrating Computerized Linguistic and Social Network Analyses to Capture Addiction Recovery Capital in an Online Community
Published on: May 31, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Persuasion Strategies
Sign Convention
The normal force acts perpendicular to the beam's cross-section and can...
Conformity
Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Confirmation Biases
Groupthink