System Maintenance Notice

Please note that maintenance work is scheduled between 4 AM and 5 AM - CET. During this time, you may experience reduced performance. Thanks for your patience.

Publications

Editorial Ppublish 1 citation

PubMed: 42744459 DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2026.06.015

Delphi-based consensus studies: persistent challenges of bias.

Br J Anaesth 137(4):941-946

Authors: Prashant Nasa, Marcus J Schultz, Deven Juneja

Affiliations

  • Department of Critical Care Medicine and Anaesthesia, New Cross Hospital, The Royal Wolverhampton, NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK; Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Department of Anaesthesiology, Rescue and Pain Medicine Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, HOCH Health Ostschweiz, St. Gallen, Switzerland; Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand; Department of Anesthesia, General Intensive Care and Pain Management, Division of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Institute of Critical Care Medicine, Max Super Specialty Hospital Saket, New Delhi, India.

Abstract

Delphi methodology plays an important role in consensus development in areas where evidence is limited, ambiguous, or heterogeneous. However, the process remains inherently vulnerable to cognitive and methodological biases involving principal investigators, expert panellists, and other stakeholders. Recognising and proactively addressing these biases is essential to improve the rigour, transparency, and credibility of Delphi-based consensus research. Future efforts should focus on developing structured frameworks for transparent reporting and systematic implementation of bias mitigation strategies throughout the Delphi process.

MeSH

Bias, Anesthesiology, Qualitative Research