The study is done for the Province of Ontario and does not apply to other provinces, and as such is not generalizable. It is subjective and biased as well, because it is not the patients that are describing the benefits of the medicine but the Doctors that prescribed the medicine. Why could not the patient provide this data. Furthermore, the six categories add confusion rather than clarity to the study. The data collected is neither transparent nor transferable.
Lay members' opinions are rather obscure and add no important knowledge to the report or to the study. The gem-like study leaves me confused.
Competing interests: No competing interests