Impact of varying panel membership on ratings of appropriateness in consensus panels : a comparison of a multi- and single disciplinary panel

by Ian D. Coulter, Alan H. Adams, Paul G. Shekelle

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price
Add to Cart Paperback15 pages Free

The objective of the study was to examine the appropriateness ratings for the use of spinal manipulation for low back pain of a multidisciplinary panel of medical and chiropractic physicians, and those of a panel composed only of chiropractic physicians. The study showed that while both panels were more likely to rate the indications as inappropriate than appropriate, the single disciplinary panel was more likely to rate an indication as appropriate than the multidisciplinary panel. The composition of a panel clearly influences the ratings and those who use a given procedure in practice, in this case manipulation, are more likely to rate it as appropriate than those who do not use the procedure.

Research conducted by

Originally published in: Health Services Research, v. 30, no. 4, October 1995, pp. 577-591.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.