1 / 22

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Cochrane Colloquium 2011 Madrid, Spain

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Cochrane Colloquium 2011 Madrid, Spain. Designing Sustainable Evidence-based Health Care in Times of Crisis. Kay Dickersin, MA, PhD October 22, 2011. CER: Why now?. Orzag, CBO. 2007. Comparative Effectiveness Research.

fausta
Télécharger la présentation

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Cochrane Colloquium 2011 Madrid, Spain

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER)Cochrane Colloquium 2011Madrid, Spain Designing Sustainable Evidence-based Health Care in Times of Crisis Kay Dickersin, MA, PhD October 22, 2011

  2. CER: Why now? Orzag, CBO. 2007. Comparative Effectiveness Research

  3. Medicare spending and quality of care Baicker et al. Health Affairs web exclusives, October 7, 2004

  4. December 2007

  5. IOM (Institute of Medicine) Report: Knowing What Works in Healthcare. A Roadmap for the Nation Proposed a new entity with authority to produce systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness Set priorities, fund, manage systematic reviews Develop common language and standards January 24, 2008

  6. IOM recommendations (selected) 2008 A National Clinical Effectiveness Assessment Program should: • Invest in advancing the scientific methods underlying the conduct of systematic reviews; • Assess the capacity of the research workforce to meet the Program’s needs. • If deemed appropriate, expand training opportunities in systematic review and comparative effectiveness research methods.

  7. IOM Report: Initial National Priorities for CER Methods commonly used in CER • Controlled trials • Observational studies • Registry studies, large datasets • Cohort studies • Case control studies • Cross sectional studies • Case series • Research synthesis • Systematic reviews and meta-analysis • Technology assessment June 30, 2009

  8. “And part of what we want to do is to make sure that those decisions are being made by doctors and medical experts based on evidence, based on what works, because that's not how it's working right now.” "The whole point of this is to try to encourage what works.” President Barack Obama July 22, 2009

  9. March 23, 2010 PL 111-148 The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act

  10. Established a non-profit Patient‐Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) to conduct CER: Identify national priorities for research Appoint Board of Governors AHRQ and NIH, 3 patients/consumers, 5 providers, 3 payers, 3 industry, 1 representing quality improvement or independent health services researcher, 2 representing federal or state interests. Establish Methodology Committee to set standards for CER Perform patient-centered CER The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act 2010

  11. Medicare Improvement for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 • Mandated two IOM studies: • Standards for conducting SRs • Standards for trustworthy CPGs

  12. Reports of the two committees released March 22, 2011

  13. Federally-supported initiatives related to systematic reviews • Internal programs - agency or contractual investigators: • AHRQ- EPCs (evidence-based practice centers) (n=14) • CDC - Guide to Community Preventive Services • CDC - HIV/AIDS Prevention Research Synthesis • Dept. Health & Human Services/SAMHSA - mental health and substance abuse disorders • Dept. Education - What Works Clearinghouse • Dept. Justice – Model Programs Guide

  14. Federally-supported initiatives related to systematic reviews External programs: NICHD – Cochrane Neonatal Review Group NEI – Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group NCCAM – Cochrane Complementary and Alternative Medicine Field

  15. Learn from other countries • Provide support for: • A coordinated approach • Infrastructure funds to external organizations • Methods research for clinical trials and systematic reviews • Infrastructure for investigator- initiated & commissioned systematic reviews • Ensure that mechanisms for CER support are sustained • Require a systematic review before funding a trial Source: Science 329:516; 2010

  16. http://www.pcori.org/

  17. http://www.pcori.org/

  18. PCORI Pilot Projects (Due Dec 1 2011) • Inform the national comparative effective research priorities; • Bring together different stakeholders; • Translate research into practice; • Identify gaps in relation to issues for disadvantaged populations; and • Identify predictors of patient outcomes

  19. PCORI Pilot Projects (Due Dec 1 2011) • Identify choices within patient control that may influence outcomes. • Better understand patient-clinician interactions • Assess strategies promoting patient autonomy & informed decision-making.

  20. A future for Cochrane reviews & infrastructure Under the US-CER banner? • Depends on how Cochrane needs match up with PCORI’s goals • Depends on PCORI decision to support internal vs external systematic reviews • Is Cochrane adaptable? March to its own drummer vs workable partnerships. • Right now, we have chosen to be cautiously optimistic………….

More Related