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

Individualized Patients, Personalized Care

Every patient is different, so it is very important for CER research to be designed, communicated and used in ways that recognize individual patient differences. CER typically focuses on population averages, not differences in individuals. CER research should reflect the differences in patients based on factors such as genetics, health status, and their environment. This will help ensure that CER reflects patients’ individual circumstances rather than encouraging one-size fits all solutions based on averages.

Support personalized medicine and other advances that can help improve patient care. The emerging science of personalized medicine is changing the way we think about comparative effectiveness research. Advances in genetics and other fields like health information technology are giving physicians powerful new tools to understand which treatments are likely to work best on which patients. These advances hold potential to improve patient care and health care value. If comparative effectiveness research is not designed and used in ways that reflect this, it will stymie progress in personalized medicine and discourage continued medical innovation. Comparative effectiveness programs should facilitate the ability of physicians to tailor treatments to the needs of individual patients based on genetic information and other factors.

Click here to learn more about personalized medicine and what it means for health care.