Stakeholder priorities for comparative effectiveness research in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a workshop report
- PMID: 23155144
- PMCID: PMC3603554
- DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201206-0994WS
Stakeholder priorities for comparative effectiveness research in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a workshop report
Abstract
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is intended to address the expressed needs of patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders. Representatives of 54 stakeholder groups with an interest in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) participated in workshops convened by the COPD Outcomes-based Network for Clinical Effectiveness and Research Translation (CONCERT) over a 2-year period. Year 1 focused on chronic care and care coordination. Year 2 focused on acute care and transitions in care between healthcare settings. Discussions and provisional voting were conducted via teleconferences and e-mail exchanges before the workshop. Final prioritization votes occurred after in-person discussions at the workshop. We used a modified Delphi approach to facilitate discussions and consensus building. To more easily quantify preferences and to evaluate the internal consistency of rankings, the Analytic Hierarchy Process was incorporated in Year 2. Results of preworkshop and final workshop voting often differed, suggesting that prioritization efforts relying solely on requests for topics from stakeholder groups without in-person discussion may provide different research priorities. Research priorities varied across stakeholder groups, but generally focused on studies to evaluate different approaches to healthcare delivery (e.g., spirometry for diagnosis and treatment, integrated healthcare strategies during transitions in care) rather than head-to-head comparisons of medications. This research agenda may help to inform groups intending to respond to CER funding opportunities in COPD. The methodologies used, detailed in the online supplement, may also help to inform prioritization efforts for CER in other health conditions.
References
-
- Institute of Medicine Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Washington DC: National Academies Press; June, 2009
-
- Pearson SD, Bach PB. How Medicare could use comparative effectiveness research in deciding on new coverage and reimbursement. Health Aff (Millwood) 2010;10:1796–1804 - PubMed
-
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Report to the president and the congress on comparative effectiveness research. June 30, 2009 [accessed 2012 Jan 8]. Available from: http://www.hhs.gov/recovery/programs/cer/execsummary.html
-
- One hundred eleventh Congress of the United States of America. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. H.R. 3590. 2010 [accessed 2012 Jan 2]. Available from: http://burgess.house.gov/UploadedFiles/hr3590_health_care_law_2010.pdf.
-
- Clancy C, Collins FS. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: the intersection of science and healthcare. Sci Transl Med 2010;2:37cm18 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical