Panelist identities are held separately from their responses. Ratings and comments are analyzed and reported only in anonymized, aggregate form.
PHosted onPRISM
Platform for Research & Internal Systems Management
International Delphi Consensus Study
Standardizing Post-ERCP Pancreatitis Definitions & Research Priorities
Δ
Johns Hopkins University · Radboud University Medical Center
An international expert panel converging, round by round, on the criteria that should govern how PEP is defined, risk-stratified, and studied in clinical trials.
Panel access is currently available · responses are confidential and anonymized
ISecure & Confidential
IIExpert Panel
An international panel of gastroenterologists and endoscopists with recognized expertise in ERCP and its complications.
IIIAnonymized Feedback
After each round closes, the panel receives an anonymized summary of the group’s responses and reconsiders its positions in the next round, toward consensus.
The Study
About this study
DELPHI CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS ON STANDARDIZING POST-ERCP PANCREATITIS DEFINITIONS, RESEARCH PRIORITIES — Johns Hopkins University
Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most frequent and clinically significant complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Despite extensive investigation, its definition, the stratification of patient- and procedure-related risk, and the design of preventive trials remain inconsistent across the literature, limiting comparison between studies and cumulative progress. This international Delphi study convenes experts in pancreaticobiliary endoscopy to develop consensus recommendations that standardize how PEP is defined and risk-stratified, and that establish priorities for the design of future clinical trials. Across successive, anonymized rounds, panelists rate a structured set of statements and reconsider their positions in light of the panel's aggregated responses until consensus is reached.
The Process
How the Delphi process works
1
Step 1 — RespondRate each statement in the questionnaire, adding a brief comment wherever you wish to qualify your position.
2
Step 2 — AggregateResponses are pooled and de-identified; no individual rating or comment is attributed to a named panelist.
3
Step 3 — FeedbackAfter each round, the anonymized distribution of the panel’s responses is returned, and panelists reconsider their positions toward consensus.
The Panel
Study Team
Principal Investigator
Venkata S. Akshintala, MD, PhD
Associate Professor
Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
vakshin1@jhmi.eduStudy Coordinators
Richu Ravikumar, MBBS
Post-Doctoral Research Fellow
Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
richu1499@outlook.com
Srived Meda
Post-Doctoral Research Fellow
Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
smeda1@jh.eduSteering Committee
Erwin J.M. van Geenen, MD, PhD
Dept. of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · Radboud University Medical Center
Christina J. Sperna Weiland, MD
Dept. of Gastroenterology & Hepatology · Radboud University Medical Center
Institutional Affiliations
