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

PIPC chairman delivers speech to specialty docs on importance of patient centered CER
July 6, 2010 |

Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) chairman, Tony Coelho, recently delivered a speech on patient centered comparative effectiveness research (CER) in front of fifty specialty doctors from around the country, among others, at the Alliance for Specialty Medicine’s (ASM) “Capitol Hill Advocacy Conference.” The conference took place just a day before the specialty doctors met w

 | Read More
Tony Coelho's recent speech on patient centered CER
June 24, 2010 |

Below: PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho's recent speech on patient centered CER. The speech was delivered on Tuesday, June 22, 2010 at the Alliance for Specialty Medicine's “Capitol Hill Advocacy Conference,” in Washington, D.C.

 | Read More
Lack of support for "evidence-based health care"— don't blame the patient
June 10, 2010 |

A new Health Affairs article concludes, based on focus groups and interviews, that "consumers will revolt if evidence-based efforts are perceived as rationing or as a way to deny them needed treatment."

You don't need to look any further than public reaction to the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force's updated recommendations on mammography screening to see the proof of this.
 
How should policy-makers react? Should they conclude that consumers, and even more so, patients, cannot be relied on to make evidence-based decisions, and therefore these decisions need to be made for them? Or should they conclude that evidence-based models of medical care and health delivery need to be carefully constructed so they have the trust and support of patients and consumers?

 | 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.