AHRQ Series Editorial: Public involvement improves methods development in comparative effectiveness reviews

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 63, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 471-473

  Helfand, Mark ^a  

^a PORTLAND VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATENOLOL; BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; ERYTHROPOIETIN; NOVEL ERYTHROPOIESIS STIMULATING PROTEIN;

AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY; ANEMIA; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS REVIEW; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EDITORIAL; ESOPHAGUS VARICES; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE CENTER; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEART FAILURE; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; MIGRAINE; MORTALITY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY;

EID: 77949584345     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.11.018     Document Type: Editorial

References (17)

1. Slutsky J., Atkins D., Chang S., and Collins Sharp B.A. AHRQ Series Paper 1: Comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010) 481-483 (In this issue)
2. Hernandez A., Walker E., Ioannidis J.P., and Kattan M.W. Challenges in meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials for rare harmful cardiovascular events: the case of rosiglitazone. Am Heart J 156 (2008) 23-30
3. Seidenfeld J., Piper M., Bohlius J., Weingart O., Trelle S., Engert A., et al. Comparative effectiveness of epoetin and darbepoetin for managing anemia in patients undergoing cancer treatment. Comparative effectiveness review No. 3. (Prepared by Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center Evidence-based Practice Center under contract No. 290-02-0026.) (2006), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/ehc/products/4/33/EPO%20Final.pdf (accessed March 7, 2010)
4. Chou R., Aronson N., Atkins D., Ismaila A.S., Santaguida P., Smith D.H., Whitlock E., Wilt T.J., and Moher D. AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010) 502-512 (In this issue)
5. Vandenbroucke J. Case reports in an evidence-based world. J R Soc Med 92 4 (1999) 159-163
6. Vandenbroucke J. Balancing benefits and harms in health care: observational data on harm should complement. BMJ 327 (2003) 750
7. Vandenbroucke J. Case reports of suspected adverse drug reactions: case reports were dismissed too quickly. BMJ 332 (2006) 488
8. Helfand M., and Balshem H. AHRQ Series Paper 2: Principles for developing guidance: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010) 484-490 (In this issue)
9. Freemantle N., Blonde L., Bolinder B., Gerber R.A., Hobbs F.D., Martinez L., et al. Real-world trials to answer real-world questions. Pharmacoeconomics 23 8 (2005) 747-754
10. Freemantle N., and Strack T. Real-world effectiveness of new medicines should be evaluated by appropriately designed clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol (2010) [ePub ahead of press]
11. Whitlock E.P., Lopez S.A., Chang S., Helfand M., Eder M., and Floyd N. AHRQ Series Paper 3: Identifying, selecting, and refining topics for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010) 491-501 (In this issue)
12. IOM (Institute of Medicine). Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research (2009), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
13. Owens D.K., Lohr K.N., Atkins D., Treadwell J.R., Reston J.T., Bass E.B., Chang S., and Helfand M. AHRQ Series Paper 5: Grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions-Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 63 (2010) 513-523 (In this issue)
14. GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328 (2004) 1490
15. Lohr K.N. Rating the strength of scientific evidence: relevance for quality improvement programs. Int J Qual Health Care 16 1 (2004) 9-18
16. Harris R., Helfand M., Woolf S.H., Lohr K.N., Mulrow C.D., Teutsch S.M., et al., for the Methods Work Group, Third US Preventive Services Task Force. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med 20 3 suppl (2001) 21-35
17. Drummond M., Schwartz J.S., Jönsson B., Luce B.R., Neumann P.J., Siebert U., et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 24 3 (2008) 244-258