<unk>  is the collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study.<unk>  generally implies agreement of the supermajority, though not necessarily unanimity.<unk>  is achieved through scholarly communication at conferences, the publication process, replication of reproducible results by others, scholarly debate, and peer review. A conference meant to create a<unk>  is termed as a<unk>  conference. Such measures lead to a situation in which those within the discipline can often recognize such a<unk>  where it exists; however, communicating to outsiders that<unk>  has been reached can be difficult, because the "normal" debates through which science progresses may appear to outsiders as contestation. On occasion,<unk>  institutes issue position statements intended to communicate a summary of the science from the "inside" to the "outside" of the<unk>  community, or<unk>  review articles or surveys may be published. In cases where there is little controversy regarding the subject under study, establishing the<unk>  can be quite straightforward. Popular or political debate on subjects that are controversial within the public sphere but not necessarily controversial within the<unk>  community may invoke<unk> : note such topics as evolution, climate change, the safety of genetically modified organisms, or the lack of a link between MMR vaccinations and autism.
Scientific consensus
Dynamic consent
Scope of practice
Theory of indispensable attributes
Universal design
Real world evidence
Collaborative practice agreement
Clinical peer review