• Kristin L Carman, Coretta Mallery, Maureen Maurer, Grace Wang, Steve Garfinkel, Manshu Yang, Dierdre Gilmore, Amy Windham, Marjorie Ginsburg, Shoshanna Sofaer, Marthe Gold, Ela Pathak-Sen, Todd Davies, Joanna Siegel, Rikki Mangrum, Jessica Fernandez, Jennifer Richmond, James Fishkin, and Alice Siu Chao.
• American Institutes for Research, 1000 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW, Washington, DC 20007, USA. Electronic address: KCarman@air.org.
• Soc Sci Med. 2015 May 1; 133: 11-20.

UnlabelledPublic deliberation elicits informed perspectives on complex issues that are values-laden and lack technical solutions. This Deliberative Methods Demonstration examined the effectiveness of public deliberation for obtaining informed public input regarding the role of medical evidence in U.S. healthcare. We conducted a 5-arm randomized controlled trial, assigning participants to one of four deliberative methods or to a reading materials only (RMO) control group. The four deliberative methods reflected important differences in implementation, including length of the deliberative process and mode of interaction. The project convened 76 groups between August and November 2012 in four U.S.LocationsChicago, IL; Sacramento, CA; Silver Spring, MD; and Durham, NC, capturing a sociodemographically diverse sample with specific attention to ensuring inclusion of Hispanic, African-American, and elderly participants. Of 1774 people recruited, 75% participated: 961 took part in a deliberative method and 377 participants comprised the RMO control group. To assess effectiveness of the deliberative methods overall and of individual methods, we evaluated whether mean pre-post changes on a knowledge and attitude survey were statistically different from the RMO control using ANCOVA. In addition, we calculated mean scores capturing participant views of the impact and value of deliberation. Participating in deliberation increased participants' knowledge of evidence and comparative effectiveness research and shifted participants' attitudes regarding the role of evidence in decision-making. When comparing each deliberative method to the RMO control group, all four deliberative methods resulted in statistically significant change on at least one knowledge or attitude measure. These findings were underscored by self-reports that the experience affected participants' opinions. Public deliberation offers unique potential for those seeking informed input on complex, values-laden topics affecting broad public constituencies.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…