title: Use of expert knowledge in evaluating costs and benefits of alternative service provisions: a case study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  A treatment pathway model was developed to examine the costs and benefits of the current bowel cancer service in England and to evaluate potential alternatives in service provision. To use the pathway model, various parameters and probability distributions had to be specified. They could not all be determined from empirical evidence and, instead, expert opinion was elicited in the form of statistical quantities that gave the required information. The purpose of this study is to describe the procedures used to quantify expert opinion and note examples of good practice contained in the case study.
  
  
  METHODS
  The required information was identified and preparatory discussion with four experts refined the questions they would be asked. In individual elicitation sessions they quantified their opinions, mainly in the form of point and interval estimates for specified variables. New methods have been developed for quantifying expert opinion and these were implemented in specialized software that uses interactive graphics. This software was used to elicit opinion about quantities related to measurable covariates.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Assessments for thirty-four quantities were elicited and available checks supported their validity. Eight points of good practice in eliciting and using expert judgment were evident. Parameters and probability distributions needed for the pathway model were determined from the elicited assessments. Simulation results from the pathway model were used to inform policy on bowel cancer service provision.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The study illustrates that quantifying and using expert judgment can be acceptable in real problems of practical importance. For full benefit to be gained from expert knowledge, elicitation must be conducted carefully and should be reported in detail.
authors.affiliation: Department of Mathematics and Statistics, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK. p.h.garthwaite@open.ac.uk
authors.forename: Paul H
authors.initials: PH
authors.lastname: Garthwaite
authors.forename: James B
authors.initials: JB
authors.lastname: Chilcott
authors.forename: David J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Jenkinson
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Tappenden
mesh_terms: D003110:Colonic Neoplasms / Q000628:therapy; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D019091:Critical Pathways / Q000191:economics; D004739:England; D005104:Expert Testimony; D006801:Humans; D011320:Primary Health Care / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*