ArticleHealth economics2014
Heterogeneity in action: the role of passive personalization in comparative effectiveness research.
Article in Health economics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Framework for Using Cost-effectiveness Analysis to Support Pricing and Reimbursement Decisions for New Pharmaceuticals in a Context of Evolving Treatments, Prices, and Evidence.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Understanding differences between what alternate propensity score methods estimate.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2023Article
- Assessing Variation in the Cost of Palivizumab for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prevention in Preterm Infants.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2018Article
- Measuring the Value of Pharmaceuticals in the US Health System.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- A Framework for Prioritizing Research Investments in Precision Medicine.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016Article
- What Contributes Most to High Health Care Costs? Health Care Spending in High Resource Patients.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2016Observational
- Concepts of 'personalization' in personalized medicine: implications for economic evaluation.PharmacoEconomics · 2015Article
- Are Elderly Patients With Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Overtreated? Exploring Heterogeneity in Survival Effects.Medical care · 2015Article
- ESTIMATING PERSON-CENTERED TREATMENT (PeT) EFFECTS USING INSTRUMENTAL VARIABLES: AN APPLICATION TO EVALUATING PROSTATE CANCER TREATMENTS.Journal of applied econometrics (Chichester, England)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the goal of comparative effectiveness research (CER) to inform patient-centered care, most studies fail to account for the patient-centeredness of care that already exist in practice, which we denote as passive personalization (PP). Because CER studies describe the average effectiveness of treatments rather than heterogeneity in how individual patients respond to therapies, clinical or coverage policies that respond to CER results may undermine PP in clinical practice and generate worse outcomes. We study this phenomenon empirically in the context of use of antipsychotic drugs in Medicaid patients with schizophrenia using novel instrumental variable methods. We find strong support for PP in clinical practice and demonstrate that the average effects from a CER study cannot be replicated in practice because of the presence of PP. In contrast, providing physicians with evidence to further personalize treatment can produce significant benefits.
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.