Comparative effectiveness research in practice and policy for radiation oncology

Seminars in Radiation Oncology

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 54-60

  Lawrence, William F ^a  

^a AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SIPULEUCEL T;

ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SPECIFIC SURVIVAL; CASTRATION RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOTHERAPY; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PERCEPTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROTON THERAPY; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE (U.S.); PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RADIATION ONCOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84888866594     PISSN: 10534296     EISSN: 15329461     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2013.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Slutsky J.R., Clancy C.M. Patient-centered comparative effectiveness research: Essential for high quality care. Arch Intern Med 2010, 170:403-404.
2. Ashton C.R., Wray N.P. Comparative Effectiveness Research: Evidence, Medicine, and Policy 2013, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
3. Accessed August 23, 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_effectiveness_research.
4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research: Report to the President and Congress, June 30, 2009.
5. Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research 2009, IOM (Institute of Medicine), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
6. Accessed August 23, 2013. http://pcori.org/research-we-support/pcor/.
7. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews 2011, IOM (Institute of Medicine), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
8. Slutsky J., Atkins D., Chang S., et al. AHRQ series paper 1: Comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol 2010, 63:481-483.
9. Higgins JPT, Green S (eds): Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org.
10. Owens D.K., Lohr K.N., Atkins D., et al. 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 2010, 63:513-523.
11. Samson D.A., Ratko T.A., Rothenberg B.M., et al. Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 20 2010, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
12. Wilt T.J., Shamiliyan T., Taylor B., et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Therapies for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 13 2008, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
13. Ip S., Dvorak T., Yu W.W., et al. Comparative Evaluation of Radiation Treatments for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: An Update 2010, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
14. Ratko T.A., Vats V., Brock J., et al. Local Nonsurgical Therapies for Stage I and Symptomatic Obstructive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer 2013, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
15. Long-term effects of intensive glucose lowering on cardiovascular outcomes. N Engl J Med 2011, 364:818-828. ACCORD Study Group.
16. Kantoff P.W., Higano C.S., Shore N.D., et al. IMPACT Study Investigators: Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2010, 363:411-422.
17. Meyer A.M., Carpenter W.R., Abernethy A.P., et al. Data for cancer comparative effectiveness research: Past, present, and future potential. Cancer 2012, 118:5186-5197.
18. Tunis S.R., Stryer D.B., Clancy C.M. Practical clinical trials: Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. J Am Med Assoc 2003, 290:1624-1632.
19. Sheets N.C., Goldin G.H., Meyer A.M., et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy, proton therapy, or conformal radiation therapy and morbidity and disease control in localized prostate cancer. J Am Med Assoc 2012, 307:1611-1620.
20. Carpenter W.R., Meyer A.M., Abernethy A.P., et al. A framework for understanding cancer comparative effectiveness research data needs. J Clin Epidemiol 2012, 65:1150-1158.
21. Barocas D.A., Chen V., Cooperberg M., et al. Using a population-based observational cohort study to address difficult comparative effectiveness research questions: The CEASAR study. J Comp Effectiveness Res 2013, 2:367-370.
22. Chen R.C., Nielsen E., Reeve B.B., et al. Perceptions regarding prostate cancer (CaP) treatment options: Results from the North Carolina Prostate Cancer Comparative Effectiveness and Survivorship Study (NC ProCESS). J Clin Oncol 2013, 31(suppl). [abstr 6530].
23. Jang T.L., Bekelman J.E., Liu Y., et al. Physician visits prior to treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer. Arch Intern Med 2010, 170:440-450.
24. Charles C., Gafni A., Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 1997, 44:681-692.
25. Elwyn G., Edwards A., Kinnersley P., et al. Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: The competencies of involving patients in healthcare choices. Br J Gen Pract 2000, 50:892-897.
26. Elwyn G., O'Connor A., Stacey D., et al. International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration: Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: Online international Delphi consensus process. Br Med J 2006, 333:417.
27. O'Connor AM, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Flood AB: Modifying unwarranted variations in health care: Shared decision making using patient decision aids. Health Aff (Millwood) Suppl Variation:VAR63-72, 2004.
28. Singer P.A., Tasch E.S., Stocking C., et al. Sex or survival: Trade-offs between quality and quantity of life. J Clin Oncol 1991, 9:328-334.
29. Stacey D., Bennett C.L., Barry M.J., et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011, 10:CD001431.
30. Caldon L.J., Collins K.A., Reed M.W., et al. Clinicans' concerns about decision support interventions for patients facing breast cancer surgery options: Understanding the challenge of implementing shared decision making. Health Expect 2011, 14:133-146.
31. Elwyn G, Dipl-Psych IS, Tietbohl C, et al: The implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice: A systematic review. Accessed from the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration. Accessed August 23, 2013. http://ipdas.ohri.ca/IPDAS-Implementation.pdf.
32. Hsu C., Liss D.T., Westbrook E.O., et al. Incorporating patient decision aids into standard clinical practice in an integrated delivery system. Med Decis Making 2013, 33:85-97.
33. Randhawa G: Moving to a user-driven research paradigm. eGEMs (Generating Evidence & Methods to improve patient outcomes) 1:Iss. 2, Article 2, 2013.
34. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust 2011, IOM (Institute of Medicine), The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
35. National Guidelines Clearinghouse. Accessed August 23, 2013. http://www.guideline.gov.