Consensus methods help bridge the gap between what is known and what information needs to be known by combining the opinions of key stakeholders to create knowledge. The three consensus methods that are used most often in pharmacy research are the Delphi, Nominal Group Technique (NGT), and RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). All three draw together experts’ opinions through a voting or rating step, and exchange of ideas through a moderated meeting or feedback summarizing the comments of others, or both. The Delphi, NGT, and RAM were introduced to address limitations of existing exploratory research methods seeking to generate a wider range of ideas, engage more diverse stakeholders, and obtain a sense of priorities to inform resource allocation. While the opinions of a group may be more valid than the opinions of a single person, they are still opinions and not a gold standard. How the opinions are drawn together has a significant impact on the findings, and as such, minimizing bias and maximizing quality are key concerns. Each of these methods has been modified in a range of ways, and this entry provides an overview of the original method, selected modifications, and factors for researchers to consider in both application and reporting of these methods.