Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology 4/2014

01.12.2014

Evidentiary challenges in comparative effectiveness research

verfasst von: Sally C. Morton

Erschienen in: Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

“What healthcare treatment works best, for whom, and under what circumstances?” is the central question of comparative effectiveness research (CER). This paper first defines CER, and then briefly discusses its policy origins, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), and the relationship of CER to other evidence-based medicine approaches. PCORI methodology standards for the conduct of CER are described. Specific evidentiary challenges including the need to include observational data, and assess heterogeneity of treatment effects, are identified. The last section of this paper focuses on how evidence from a systematic review, a common study design in CER, is interpreted for decision-making. Methods for assessing the strength of evidence across a group of studies are described. These assessments are used for decisions at the individual patient level as well as the public health perspective, for example to determine clinical practice guidelines. The challenges inherent in these methods are presented, along with the results from a reliability study. The implications for CER decisions and decision-makers are important to consider.
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Berkman, N.D., Lohr, K.N., Ansari, M., McDonagh, M., Balk, E., Whitlock, E., Reston, J., Bass, E., Butler, M., Gartlehner, G., Hartling, L., Kane, R., McPheeters, M., Morgan, L., Morton, S.C., Viswanathan, M., Sista P., Chang, S.: Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update. Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews (Prepared by the RTI-UNC Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10056-I). AHRQ Publication No. 13(14)-EHC130-EF. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville (2013) Berkman, N.D., Lohr, K.N., Ansari, M., McDonagh, M., Balk, E., Whitlock, E., Reston, J., Bass, E., Butler, M., Gartlehner, G., Hartling, L., Kane, R., McPheeters, M., Morgan, L., Morton, S.C., Viswanathan, M., Sista P., Chang, S.: Grading the Strength of a Body of Evidence When Assessing Health Care Interventions for the Effective Health Care Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: An Update. Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews (Prepared by the RTI-UNC Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10056-I). AHRQ Publication No. 13(14)-EHC130-EF. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville (2013)
Zurück zum Zitat Berkman, N.D., Lohr, K.N., Morgan, L.C., Kuo, T.M., Morton, S.C.: Interrater reliability of grading strength of evidence varies with the complexity of the evidence in systematic reviews. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 66(10), 1105–1117 (2013)PubMedCrossRef Berkman, N.D., Lohr, K.N., Morgan, L.C., Kuo, T.M., Morton, S.C.: Interrater reliability of grading strength of evidence varies with the complexity of the evidence in systematic reviews. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 66(10), 1105–1117 (2013)PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research: Report to the President and the Congress (2009) Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research: Report to the President and the Congress (2009)
Zurück zum Zitat Goodman, S.N.: Quasi-random reflections on randomized controlled trials and comparative effectiveness research. Clin. Trials 9, 22–26 (2012)PubMedCrossRef Goodman, S.N.: Quasi-random reflections on randomized controlled trials and comparative effectiveness research. Clin. Trials 9, 22–26 (2012)PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Greenfield, S., Sox, H.S.: Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann. Intern. Med. 151(3), 203–205 (2009)PubMedCrossRef Greenfield, S., Sox, H.S.: Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann. Intern. Med. 151(3), 203–205 (2009)PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Institute of Medicine (IOM): Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research. National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2009) Institute of Medicine (IOM): Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research. National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2009)
Zurück zum Zitat Institute of Medicine (IOM): In: Eden, J., Levitt, L., Berg, A., Morton, S.C. (eds.) Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews. National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2011) Institute of Medicine (IOM): In: Eden, J., Levitt, L., Berg, A., Morton, S.C. (eds.) Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews. National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2011)
Zurück zum Zitat Luce, B.R., Drummond, M., Jönsson, B., Neumann, P.J., Schwartz, J.S., Siebert, U., Sullivan, S.D.: EBM, HTA, and CER: clearing the confusion. Milbank Q. 88(2), 256–276 (2010)PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Luce, B.R., Drummond, M., Jönsson, B., Neumann, P.J., Schwartz, J.S., Siebert, U., Sullivan, S.D.: EBM, HTA, and CER: clearing the confusion. Milbank Q. 88(2), 256–276 (2010)PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Messerli, F.H.: Chocolate consumption, cognitive function, and Nobel Laureates. NEJM 367, 1562–1564 (2012)PubMedCrossRef Messerli, F.H.: Chocolate consumption, cognitive function, and Nobel Laureates. NEJM 367, 1562–1564 (2012)PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Mustafa, R.A., Santesso, N., Brozek, J., Akl, E.A., Walter, S.D., Norman, G., Kulasegaram, M., Christensen, R., Guyatt, G.H., Falck-Ytter, Y., Chang, S., Murad, M.H., Vist, G.E., Lasserson, T., Gartlehner, G., Shukla, V., Sun, X., Whittington, C., Post, P.N., Lang, E., Thaler, K., Kunnamo, I., Alenius, H., Meerpohl, J.J., Alba, A.C., Nevis, I.F., Gentles, S., Ethier, M.C., Carrasco-Labra, A., Khatib, R., Nesrallah, G., Kroft, J., Selk, A., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Schünemann, H.J.: The GRADE approach is reproducible in assessing the quality of evidence of quantitative evidence syntheses. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 66(7), 736–742 (2013)PubMedCrossRef Mustafa, R.A., Santesso, N., Brozek, J., Akl, E.A., Walter, S.D., Norman, G., Kulasegaram, M., Christensen, R., Guyatt, G.H., Falck-Ytter, Y., Chang, S., Murad, M.H., Vist, G.E., Lasserson, T., Gartlehner, G., Shukla, V., Sun, X., Whittington, C., Post, P.N., Lang, E., Thaler, K., Kunnamo, I., Alenius, H., Meerpohl, J.J., Alba, A.C., Nevis, I.F., Gentles, S., Ethier, M.C., Carrasco-Labra, A., Khatib, R., Nesrallah, G., Kroft, J., Selk, A., Brignardello-Petersen, R., Schünemann, H.J.: The GRADE approach is reproducible in assessing the quality of evidence of quantitative evidence syntheses. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 66(7), 736–742 (2013)PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M.C., Gray, J.A.M., Haynes, R.B., Richardson, W.S.: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312(7023), 71–72 (1996)PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M.C., Gray, J.A.M., Haynes, R.B., Richardson, W.S.: Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312(7023), 71–72 (1996)PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Slutsky, J.R., Clancy, C.M.: AHRQ’s Effective Health Care Program: why comparative effectiveness matters. Am. J. Med. Qual. 24, 67–70 (2009)PubMedCrossRef Slutsky, J.R., Clancy, C.M.: AHRQ’s Effective Health Care Program: why comparative effectiveness matters. Am. J. Med. Qual. 24, 67–70 (2009)PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Thorpe, K.E., Zwarenstein, M., Oxman, A.D., Trweek, S., Furberg, C.D., Altman, D.G., Tunis, S., Bergel, E., Harvey, I., Magid, D.J., Chalkidou, K.: A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 62, 464–475 (2009)PubMedCrossRef Thorpe, K.E., Zwarenstein, M., Oxman, A.D., Trweek, S., Furberg, C.D., Altman, D.G., Tunis, S., Bergel, E., Harvey, I., Magid, D.J., Chalkidou, K.: A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 62, 464–475 (2009)PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Evidentiary challenges in comparative effectiveness research
verfasst von
Sally C. Morton
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 1387-3741
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-9400
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-014-0119-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology 4/2014 Zur Ausgabe