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

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
PIPC urges inclusion of Senate CER provision in final reform legislation
December 10, 2009 |

Agree or disagree with the recent changes to mammography guidelines by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), one thing is clear – two sets of highly qualified experts can come to very different conclusions when looking at the same evidence. This holds big implications for provisions of health care reform like comparative effectiveness research (CER).

 | Read More

For Reporters

For journalists and other media professionals

More Information

Stay Connected

Independent and Inclusive

To keep a new CER research entity centered on improving patient care, it is important for it to be independent so that it isn't dominated by any one group. This means everyone in the health care community, including patients and providers, needs to be included, and the group needs to operate with full transparency and public accountability. The entire research process of a new CER entity from deciding priorities to finalizing and communicating research results should be open and transparent to the public. Allowing for public review and comment throughout the research process will give an opportunity to providers, patient advocates, and independent researchers to deliver their perspective and keep the work of institute accountable to the public.