Article Title

Citizens' juries can bring public voices on overdiagnosis into policy making


As practitioners and policy makers struggle to manage the risks and harms of overdiagnosis, Chris Degeling and colleagues contend that citizens’ juries offer a way forward.

Key messages

Overdiagnosis challenges the social contract that underpins healthcare, and community voices are often missing from the relevant policy discussions

Citizens’ juries elicit the voices, values, and preferences of informed citizens who are presented with evidence based expert views

Jurors deliberate the evidence among themselves before formulating their opinions and recommendations

Citizens’ juries can elucidate public values that can then be used to inform policies and practices to manage the risks of overdiagnosis

The findings can contribute to guideline development and proposed changes to disease thresholds

The process of citizens’ juries align with the basic tenets of evidence based medicine and can broaden and improve the dialogue around medical uncertainty


overdiagnosis, policy, citizens’ juries

Link to Publisher Version (URL)


This document is currently not available here.

Find in your library