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

Quality and Cost

Define CER as a tool to improve patient care, not as a tool for cost containment: CER has value in helping patients and providers make good decisions, but only if it answers the questions that matter to them. CER that starts with cost containment goal will not lead to studies that answer these questions, and likely will result in misapplication of findings in order to achieve cost-cutting objective. CER that begins with the goal of quality improvement can help everyone in health care make better decisions, and will ultimately lead to better health care value.
 
Provide information on clinical value and patient health outcomes, not cost-effectiveness assessment: Providing doctors with information about the effectiveness of new tests and treatments can help them make better treatment decisions for their patients. But if the Institute conducts cost-effectiveness research, it will end up putting a dollar value on human life based on average study results that ignore differences between patients. The Institute's research should not include cost-effectiveness determinations, which would lead to a focus on cetralized judgments about which healthcare options should be available.