["Health Expectations, Volume 29, Issue 3, June 2026. ", "\nABSTRACT\n\nIntroduction\nEstablishing shared terminology between health professionals and consumers is essential for truly embedding interdisciplinary person‐centred models of care. When discussing concepts related to person‐centred care, terminology differs amongst health professionals from different disciplines and program areas, and between health professionals and consumers. Inconsistent terminology creates confusion, potentially inhibiting person‐centred care. We aimed to establish consensus amongst health professionals and between consumers and health professionals regarding terminology relating to person‐centred care within a large Australian public healthcare organisation.\n\n\nMethods\nConsensus was sought amongst health professionals from multiple disciplines/program areas for six concepts, and between health professionals and consumers for two concepts associated with person‐centred care. An online modified Delphi process was used, with consensus pre‐defined as 70% agreement. Health professionals with different professional backgrounds, working in diverse program areas were purposefully invited via email to participate in this study. To recruit consumers, email invitations were sent to members of consumer groups active within the healthcare organisation and in‐person to consumers currently receiving care across this organisation.\n\n\nResults\nFifty‐two staff members with medical, nursing, allied health, pharmacy or support backgrounds from 12 diverse program areas and 35 consumers participated. Consensus was reached amongst health professionals for the six concepts presented to health professionals after three to four rounds. Consensus could not be reached between consumers and health professionals for the two concepts presented to both groups after four rounds. For these two concepts, terminology was narrowed down to two alternatives.\n\n\nConclusion\nResults have highlighted that although it was possible to gain consensus on terminology related to person‐centred care amongst health professionals it was not possible to gain consensus with health professionals and consumers. This has important implications for delivering person‐centred care and fostering meaningful partnerships with consumers in healthcare planning and delivery.\n\n\nPatient or Public Contribution\nThree healthcare consumers served on the project governance committee, providing lived experience guidance and a consumer perspective throughout all stages of the project. The Round One Delphi terms were informed by qualitative interviews from previous work exploring healthcare consumers’ experiences of accessing and receiving care across settings. Healthcare consumers were integral to the four‐round Modified Delphi process, contributing essential subject matter expertise based on their lived experience.\n\n"]