Possible outcomes of comparative effectiveness research

JAMA

Volumn 302, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 194-195

  Brook, Robert H ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEVICE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG RESEARCH; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; LAW; NOTE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; UNITED STATES; ARTICLE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; LEGAL ASPECT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT;

FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE REFORM; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; PUBLIC SECTOR; UNITED STATES;

EID: 67650142795     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.996     Document Type: Note

References (5)

1. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. US Government Printing Office Web site. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi? dbname=111-cong-bills&docid=f:h1enr.pdf. Accessibility verified June 10, 2009.
2. The White House. Issues: health care. http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/ health-care/. Accessed May 22, 2009.
3. Baucus M. Call to Action Health Reform 2009. Washington, DC: Senate Finance Committee; 2008.
4. McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J, et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(26):2635-2645.
5. Kyl J Senate Amendment 793 to Senate Continuing Resolution 13. 2009.