Case Studies

An NIH study of treatments for high blood pressure, called the ALLHAT trial, shows some of the strengths and limitations of comparative effectiveness research to improve patient care. More...

Recent Blog Posts

Differing interpretations on procedure’s worth illustrate that no CER result should be final word
March 10, 2010 |

A recent Wall Street Journal article about the use of stent procedures in the medical community and the reaction to it by blogger Burt Cohen, offers another illustration of the complexities of comparative research, and again shows why results should be used to inform doctors and patients, but not to impose broad “one size fits all” prescriptions that do not reflect the complexities of the science or the differences in individual patients.

| Read More
Researcher knows common flaws in CER studies, dangers of result's misuse
March 8, 2010 |

A recent article by Jerome Groopman, M.D, provides some valuable, first-hand insight as to what can go wrong when policy makers “give teeth” to comparative effectiveness research (CER) studies by translating results into “best practices.” Groopman’s understanding of the limitations of CER and the complexities of delivery high quality care to each patient, lead him to caution against blunt application of CER in ways that do not give physicians the ability to deviat

 | Read More
New USPSTF guidelines underscore need for patient-centered CER
December 16, 2009 |

A few days ago, I posted about what I saw as one of the key lessons from the controversy over the new U.S. Preventive Services Task Force’s (USPSTF) mammography guidelines, namely, that expert panels can sometimes come to different conclusions based on the same evidence.

| Read More

For Reporters

For journalists and other media professionals

More Information

Stay Connected

About

Who we are:

The Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) is a diverse group of healthcare organization representing patients, physicians and other health care providers, researchers and innovators, and other groups that have come together to promote comparative effectiveness research that supports patient access and informed health care decision-making and fosters continued medical progress. PIPC is lead by a Steering Committee of nine groups that represent the partnership's diverse members. The PIPC member list and steering committee reflect a wide range of support within the health care community.

What we do:

PIPC is dedicated to supporting comparative effectiveness research that strengthens physician and patient decision making, improves health care quality, and supports continued medical progress.

To make that happen, we aim to raise awareness:

  • About the value of well-designed comparative effectiveness research (CER).
  • About the need to ensure that proposals to expand the government's role in CER are centered on patient needs.
  • About the important role of continued medical innovation as part of the solution to cost and quality challenges in health.