Comparative Effectiveness Research in Practice and Policy for Radiation Oncology
Section snippets
What We Know
A major role of CER is to inform clinicians in their practice, both for the purposes of their decision making and for informing their patients so that they are better able to participate in shared decision making regarding their health care options. One of the primary ways that CER can inform physicians is to help understand what is currently known through systematic reviews that provide thorough syntheses on available research literature on health care interventions. In our rapidly evolving
Informing Patients
Information from CER is aimed at informing patient decision making, as well as clinician decision making. Shared decision making involves at least the clinician and the patient,24, 25 and it may include others such as family members. A critical part of this process involves informing patients about the potential benefits and harms of their health care options. CER has helped support patient decision making by providing outcomes data to inform patients about relevant outcomes. If the benefits of
Informing Policy
Although CER has the potential to be applicable to a wide range of policy applications—for example, pharmacy formulary decision making, acquiring a facility to add PBT to current institutional capacity, insurance coverage, and reimbursement—finding clear evidence of use of research to inform these decision-making processes is not always available in the published literature. The conceptual approach is similar; however, the goal of CER for policy applications would be to help inform decision
Conclusions
As the explicit goal of CER is to inform decisions about health care, this research helps to bridge the traditional research enterprise to clinical practice and to health care policy. Inclusion of literature syntheses in CER helps to provide a comprehensive view of what we know from existing research, and provides a clear understanding of research gaps. Focusing new research on these gaps will address important areas of uncertainty that may hinder optimal decision making about health care
References (35)
- et al.
AHRQ series paper 1: Comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program
J Clin Epidemiol
(2010) - et al.
AHRQ series paper 5: Grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions—Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health Care Program
J Clin Epidemiol
(2010) - et al.
A framework for understanding cancer comparative effectiveness research data needs
J Clin Epidemiol
(2012) - et al.
Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango)
Soc Sci Med
(1997) - et al.
Patient-centered comparative effectiveness research: Essential for high quality care
Arch Intern Med
(2010) - et al.
Comparative Effectiveness Research: Evidence, Medicine, and Policy
(2013) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_effectiveness_research. Accessed August 23,...
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research:...
Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research
(2009)- http://pcori.org/research-we-support/pcor/. Accessed August 23,...
Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 20
Comparative Effectiveness of Therapies for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 13
Comparative Evaluation of Radiation Treatments for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: An Update
Local Nonsurgical Therapies for Stage I and Symptomatic Obstructive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Long-term effects of intensive glucose lowering on cardiovascular outcomes
N Engl J Med
Cited by (1)
Tenascin-C: Exploitation and collateral damage in cancer management
2015, Cell Adhesion and Migration
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not represent official policy of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the Department of Health and Human Services.
The author declares no conflict of interest.