Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Comparative Effectiveness Research (comparative + effectiveness_research)
Selected AbstractsComparative Effectiveness Research Priorities at Federal Agencies: The View from the Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institute on Aging, and Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityJOURNAL OF AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, Issue 6 2010Timothy J. O'Leary MD In the last year, attention has been focused on translating federally sponsored health research into better health for Americans. Since the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) on February 17, 2009, ARRA funds to support Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) have increased this focus. A large proportion of topical areas of interest in CER affects the older segment of the population. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) have supported robust research portfolios focused on aging populations that meet the varying definitions of CER. This short article briefly describes the research missions of the AHRQ, NIA, and VA. The various definitions of CER as the Congressional Budget Office, the Institute of Medicine, and the ARRA-established Federal Coordinating Council have put forward, as well as important topics for which CER is particularly needed, are then reviewed. Finally, approaches in which the three agencies support CER involving the aging population are set forth and opportunities for future CER research outlined. [source] US Health Care Reform and Transplantation, Part II: Impact on the Public Sector and Novel Health Care Delivery SystemsAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 10 2010D. A. Axelrod The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in 2010 will result in dramatic expansion of publically funded health insurance coverage for low-income individuals. It is estimated that of the 32 million newly insured, 16 million will obtain coverage through expansion of the Medicaid Program, and the remaining 16 million will purchase coverage through their employer or newly legislated insurance exchanges. While the Act contains numerous provisions to improve access to private insurance as discussed in Part I of this analysis, public sector coverage will significantly be affected. The cost of health care reform will be borne disproportionately by Medicare, which faces nearly $500 billion in cuts to be identified by a new independent board. Transplant centers should be concerned about the impact of the reform on the financial aspects of transplantation. In addition, this legislation also utilizes the Medicare Program to drive reform of the health care delivery system, by encouraging the development of integrated Accountable Care Organizations, experimentation with new ,models' of health care delivery, and expanded support for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Transplant providers, including transplant centers and physicians/surgeons need to lead this movement, drawing on our experience providing comprehensive multidisciplinary care under global budgets with publically reported outcomes. [source] Comparative Effectiveness Research and Evidence-Based Health Policy: Experience from Four CountriesTHE MILBANK QUARTERLY, Issue 2 2009KALIPSO CHALKIDOU Context: The discussion about improving the efficiency, quality, and long-term sustainability of the U.S. health care system is increasingly focusing on the need to provide better evidence for decision making through comparative effectiveness research (CER). In recent years, several other countries have established agencies to evaluate health technologies and broader management strategies to inform health care policy decisions. This article reviews experiences from Britain, France, Australia, and Germany. Methods: This article draws on the experience of senior technical and administrative staff in setting up and running the CER entities studied. Besides reviewing the agencies' websites, legal framework documents, and informal interviews with key stakeholders, this analysis was informed by a workshop bringing together U.S. and international experts. Findings: This article builds a matrix of features identified from the international models studied that offer insights into near-term decisions about the location, design, and function of a U.S.-based CER entity. While each country has developed a CER capacity unique to its health system, elements such as the inclusiveness of relevant stakeholders, transparency in operation, independence of the central government and other interests, and adaptability to a changing environment are prerequisites for these entities' successful operation. Conclusions: While the CER entities evolved separately and have different responsibilities, they have adopted a set of core structural, technical, and procedural principles, including mechanisms for engaging with stakeholders, governance and oversight arrangements, and explicit methodologies for analyzing evidence, to ensure a high-quality product that is relevant to their system. [source] Comparative effectiveness research: Implications for hospital medicine,,JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL MEDICINE, Issue 5 2010Kate Goodrich MD First page of article [source] NerveCenter: Comparative effectiveness research in neurology: Healthcare reform will increase the focus on finding the most effective,And affordable,TreatmentANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, Issue 1 2010Article first published online: 25 JUN 2010 No abstract is available for this article. [source] Comparative effectiveness research in the neurosciencesANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, Issue 2 2009PhD Editor, S. Claiborne Johnston MD No abstract is available for this article. [source] Need for comparative effectiveness research to address clinical questions in hematology,AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HEMATOLOGY, Issue 10 2009Jodi B. Segal No abstract is available for this article. [source] Comparative Effectiveness Research and Evidence-Based Health Policy: Experience from Four CountriesTHE MILBANK QUARTERLY, Issue 2 2009KALIPSO CHALKIDOU Context: The discussion about improving the efficiency, quality, and long-term sustainability of the U.S. health care system is increasingly focusing on the need to provide better evidence for decision making through comparative effectiveness research (CER). In recent years, several other countries have established agencies to evaluate health technologies and broader management strategies to inform health care policy decisions. This article reviews experiences from Britain, France, Australia, and Germany. Methods: This article draws on the experience of senior technical and administrative staff in setting up and running the CER entities studied. Besides reviewing the agencies' websites, legal framework documents, and informal interviews with key stakeholders, this analysis was informed by a workshop bringing together U.S. and international experts. Findings: This article builds a matrix of features identified from the international models studied that offer insights into near-term decisions about the location, design, and function of a U.S.-based CER entity. While each country has developed a CER capacity unique to its health system, elements such as the inclusiveness of relevant stakeholders, transparency in operation, independence of the central government and other interests, and adaptability to a changing environment are prerequisites for these entities' successful operation. Conclusions: While the CER entities evolved separately and have different responsibilities, they have adopted a set of core structural, technical, and procedural principles, including mechanisms for engaging with stakeholders, governance and oversight arrangements, and explicit methodologies for analyzing evidence, to ensure a high-quality product that is relevant to their system. [source] IOM task impossible: Set the agenda for neurological comparative effectiveness researchANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, Issue 5 2009PhD Editor, S. Claiborne Johnston MD No abstract is available for this article. [source] Strategies for making analgesia safer: The role of comparative effectiveness researchARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM, Issue 6 2010Daniel H. Solomon No abstract is available for this article. [source] Fears and promises of comparative effectiveness researchACTA PAEDIATRICA, Issue 9 2010Tobias Loddenkemper No abstract is available for this article. [source] | ||||||||||