Variable agreement among experts regarding Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease

Theodore K. Marras; D. Rebecca Prevots; Frances B. Jamieson; Kevin L. Winthrop

doi:10.1111/resp.12440

Variable agreement among experts regarding Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease

Theodore K. Marras, D. Rebecca Prevots, Frances B. Jamieson, Kevin L. Winthrop

Ophthalmology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

Data regarding many clinical aspects of pulmonary Mycobacterium avium complex (pMAC) are lacking. Guidelines rely substantially upon expert opinion, integrated through face-to-face meetings, variably weighting individual opinions. We surveyed North American non-tuberculous mycobacteria experts regarding clinical aspects of pMAC using Delphi methods. Nineteen of 26 invited experts (73%) responded, with extensive variability. Convergence could not be reached for most questions. Respondents described extensive uncertainty around specific issues. Findings underscore urgent need for more research. See Editorial, page 181

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	348-351
Number of pages	4
Journal	Respirology
Volume	20
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.12440
State	Published - Feb 1 2015

Keywords

Delphi technique
Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare infection
mycobacterium infection
non-tuberculous mycobacterium
practice guideline

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Access to Document

10.1111/resp.12440

Cite this

@article{3d95c58c05184abc8d932502fe8219e5,

title = "Variable agreement among experts regarding Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease",

abstract = "Data regarding many clinical aspects of pulmonary Mycobacterium avium complex (pMAC) are lacking. Guidelines rely substantially upon expert opinion, integrated through face-to-face meetings, variably weighting individual opinions. We surveyed North American non-tuberculous mycobacteria experts regarding clinical aspects of pMAC using Delphi methods. Nineteen of 26 invited experts (73%) responded, with extensive variability. Convergence could not be reached for most questions. Respondents described extensive uncertainty around specific issues. Findings underscore urgent need for more research. See Editorial, page 181",

keywords = "Delphi technique, Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare infection, mycobacterium infection, non-tuberculous mycobacterium, practice guideline",

author = "Marras, {Theodore K.} and Prevots, {D. Rebecca} and Jamieson, {Frances B.} and Winthrop, {Kevin L.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2014 Asian Pacific Society of Respirology.",

year = "2015",

month = feb,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/resp.12440",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "20",

pages = "348--351",

journal = "Respirology",

issn = "1323-7799",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Variable agreement among experts regarding Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease

AU - Marras, Theodore K.

AU - Prevots, D. Rebecca

AU - Jamieson, Frances B.

AU - Winthrop, Kevin L.

PY - 2015/2/1

Y1 - 2015/2/1

N2 - Data regarding many clinical aspects of pulmonary Mycobacterium avium complex (pMAC) are lacking. Guidelines rely substantially upon expert opinion, integrated through face-to-face meetings, variably weighting individual opinions. We surveyed North American non-tuberculous mycobacteria experts regarding clinical aspects of pMAC using Delphi methods. Nineteen of 26 invited experts (73%) responded, with extensive variability. Convergence could not be reached for most questions. Respondents described extensive uncertainty around specific issues. Findings underscore urgent need for more research. See Editorial, page 181

AB - Data regarding many clinical aspects of pulmonary Mycobacterium avium complex (pMAC) are lacking. Guidelines rely substantially upon expert opinion, integrated through face-to-face meetings, variably weighting individual opinions. We surveyed North American non-tuberculous mycobacteria experts regarding clinical aspects of pMAC using Delphi methods. Nineteen of 26 invited experts (73%) responded, with extensive variability. Convergence could not be reached for most questions. Respondents described extensive uncertainty around specific issues. Findings underscore urgent need for more research. See Editorial, page 181

KW - Delphi technique

KW - Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare infection

KW - mycobacterium infection

KW - non-tuberculous mycobacterium

KW - practice guideline

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921507854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921507854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/resp.12440

DO - 10.1111/resp.12440

M3 - Article

C2 - 25430584

AN - SCOPUS:84921507854

SN - 1323-7799

VL - 20

SP - 348

EP - 351

JO - Respirology

JF - Respirology

IS - 2

ER -

Variable agreement among experts regarding Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this