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

Tony Coelho Discusses Patient Care with Former HHS Secretary
February 3, 2012 |

On Tuesday night, PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho joined former HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson at the University of Charleston in West Virginia for a speaker series titled "Who Decides Patient Treatments" to discuss the future of health care in the United States.

 | Read More
PCORI Releases their Draft Priorities
January 30, 2012 |

PCORI released a draft of their National Priorities for Research and Research Agenda for public comment. The PCORI Board, which is responsible for funding research, is asking for a 55 day public comment period to discuss and solicit feedback from patients, caregivers, professionals, and the general public on the research priorities.

In the draft, PCORI prioritized five broad research areas:

 | Read More
Differentiating Patients, Consumers, and Patient Advocacy Organizations
October 18, 2011 |

When conducting Comparative Effectiveness Research it is crucial to understand the differences between the players involved in the process. In his remarks at the  2nd Annual Forum on Achieving Patient centeredness , Marc Boutin, executive vice president and COO at the National Health Council, discussed the important differences between the three major players in the process: the patient, the consumer, and the patient advocacy organization. He stated that many times when the patient is discussed they are not defined.

 | Read More

For Reporters

For journalists and other media professionals

More Information

Stay Connected

Better Outcomes and Improved Quality

In addition to being included in the governance of a CER institute, patients and providers should have a central in deciding which research questions the institute should answer.
Having an open, patient-centered process for setting research goals and allowing patient and provider voices to be heard will ensure that comparative research yields results that are relevant to them. By working on the research questions that matter most to patients and doctors, the institute's work will have the maximum positive affect on improved patient outcomes and health care quality.
Assuring that studies are technically sound and appropriate will enhance the research's credibility. Poorly done CER has the potential to undermine high-quality health care. Methods for conducting CER are still maturing, and it will be critical to ensure that studies undergo an independent peer-review process before research results are finalized and incorporated into the health care delivery system.