Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012 Dec 1;30(34):4208-14.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.2659. Epub 2012 Oct 15.

Methods in comparative effectiveness research

Affiliations
Review

Methods in comparative effectiveness research

Katrina Armstrong. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) seeks to assist consumers, clinicians, purchasers, and policy makers to make informed decisions to improve health care at both the individual and population levels. CER includes evidence generation and evidence synthesis. Randomized controlled trials are central to CER because of the lack of selection bias, with the recent development of adaptive and pragmatic trials increasing their relevance to real-world decision making. Observational studies comprise a growing proportion of CER because of their efficiency, generalizability to clinical practice, and ability to examine differences in effectiveness across patient subgroups. Concerns about selection bias in observational studies can be mitigated by measuring potential confounders and analytic approaches, including multivariable regression, propensity score analysis, and instrumental variable analysis. Evidence synthesis methods include systematic reviews and decision models. Systematic reviews are a major component of evidence-based medicine and can be adapted to CER by broadening the types of studies included and examining the full range of benefits and harms of alternative interventions. Decision models are particularly suited to CER, because they make quantitative estimates of expected outcomes based on data from a range of sources. These estimates can be tailored to patient characteristics and can include economic outcomes to assess cost effectiveness. The choice of method for CER is driven by the relative weight placed on concerns about selection bias and generalizability, as well as pragmatic concerns related to data availability and timing. Value of information methods can identify priority areas for investigation and inform research methods.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Author's disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
Experimental and observational study designs. In a randomized controlled trial, a population of interest is screened for eligibility, randomly assigned to alternative interventions, and observed for outcomes of interest. In an observational study, the population of interest is assigned to alternative interventions based on patient, provider, and system factors and observed for outcomes of interest.
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
Meta-analysis of observational studies of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and coronary artery disease incidence comparing studies that did and did not adjust for socioeconomic status (SES). Data adapted.

References

    1. Committee on Comparative Effectiveness Research Prioritization, Institute of Medicine: Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2009. Summary: Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research; p. 29.
    1. Berwick DM, Nolan TW, Whittington J. The triple aim: Care, health, and cost. Health Aff (Millwood) 2008;27:759–769. - PubMed
    1. Brook RH. Can the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute become relevant to controlling medical costs and improving value? JAMA. 2011;306:2020–2021. - PubMed
    1. Federal Coordinating Council: Report to the President and the Congress on Comparative Effectiveness Research. http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/cer/execsummary.html.
    1. Sox HC, Goodman SN. The methods of comparative effectiveness research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2012;33:425–445. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms