- The Issue
- The Solutions
- News & Media
- Case Studies
- Policy Center
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...
For journalists and other media professionals
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.
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:
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.
According to an article in Inside Health Policy, the American Medical Association is circulating a letter set go to the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) raising concerns should PCORI use cost considerations in their definition of what they considered P
Several prominent figures have discussed patient-centered outcomes research over the past couple of weeks, including Richard Gliklich, M.D., President and CEO of Outcome, who recently posted an article on KevinMD.
Last week, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute’s (PCORI) Board of Governors held a meeting in Washington, D.C., to discuss the importance of patient centered comparative effectiveness research (CER) – also called outcomes research. Several PIPC members were in attendance, including PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho.
A little-noticed provision of the Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Resolution which was passed earlier this month requires the Government Accountability Office to conduct an audit of government CER projects funded by the Recovery Act and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Due just two months from the date of enactment, this provision could prove interesting to anyone who follows the issue of comparative effectiveness research. The provision states:
Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) Chairman Tony Coelho recently discussed the importance of patient-centered CER at a Health Affairs briefing entitled “Comparative Effectiveness Research Enters New Era” in Washington, D.C.
A letter-to-the-editor from Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) Chairman Tony Coelho was recently published in the New York Times.
The headline of a recent Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement blog poses the question: “Will CER Really Make a Difference if the Public Doesn’t Want It?”
Identifying the answer to this question could help ensure that CER really does makes the difference we all hope it will.