ArticleClinical and translational science2011
A CTSA agenda to advance methods for comparative effectiveness research.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acknowledging patient heterogeneity in economic evaluation : a systematic literature review.PharmacoEconomics · 2013Pooled it
- MIFuzzy Clustering for Incomplete Longitudinal Data in Smart Health.Smart health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2017Article
- Understanding practice-based research participation: The differing motivations of engaged vs. non-engaged clinicians in pragmatic clinical trials.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2016Article
- Multiple- vs Non- or Single-Imputation based Fuzzy Clustering for Incomplete Longitudinal Behavioral Intervention Data....IEEE...International Conference on Connected Health: Applications, Systems and Engineering Technologies. IEEE International Conference on Connected Health: Applications, Systems and Engineering Technologies · 2016Article
- The predicament of comparative effectiveness research using observational data.Annals of internal medicine · 2015Article
- The Patient-centered Outcomes Research Institute's Role in Advancing Methods for Patient-centered Outcomes Research.Medical care · 2015Article
- A national strategy to develop pragmatic clinical trials infrastructure.Clinical and translational science · 2014Article
- A partnership of two U.S. research networks to improve public health.American journal of preventive medicine · 2013Article
- The patient is in: patient involvement strategies for diagnostic error mitigation.BMJ quality & safety · 2013Review
- Value-of-information analysis within a stakeholder-driven research prioritization process in a US setting: an application in cancer genomics.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2013Article
- Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of pragmatic clinical trials in older adults in the United States.Contemporary clinical trials · 2012Article
- Building the evidence base for decision making in cancer genomic medicine using comparative effectiveness research.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2012Review
- The PBRN initiative: transforming new technologies to improve patient care.Journal of dental research · 2012Article
- Psychosocial interventions for patients with chronic disease.BioPsychoSocial medicine · 2012Article
- Role of practice-based research networks in comparative effectiveness research.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2012Review
- A New MI-Based Visualization Aided Validation Index for Mining Big Longitudinal Web Trial Data.IEEE access : practical innovations, open solutionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical research needs to be more useful to patients, clinicians, and other decision makers. To meet this need, more research should focus on patient-centered outcomes, compare viable alternatives, and be responsive to individual patients' preferences, needs, pathobiology, settings, and values. These features, which make comparative effectiveness research (CER) fundamentally patient-centered, challenge researchers to adopt or develop methods that improve the timeliness, relevance, and practical application of clinical studies. In this paper, we describe 10 priority areas that address 3 critical needs for research on patient-centered outcomes (PCOR): (1) developing and testing trustworthy methods to identify and prioritize important questions for research; (2) improving the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical research studies; and (3) linking the process and outcomes of actual practice to priorities for research on patient-centered outcomes. We argue that the National Institutes of Health, through its clinical and translational research program, should accelerate the development and refinement of methods for CER by linking a program of methods research to the broader portfolio of large, prospective clinical and health system studies it supports. Insights generated by this work should be of enormous value to PCORI and to the broad range of organizations that will be funding and implementing CER.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.