National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report
Latest available findings on quality of and access to health care
Data
- Data Infographics
- Data Visualizations
- Data Tools
- Data Innovations
- All-Payer Claims Database
- Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP)
- Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS)
- AHRQ Quality Indicator Tools for Data Analytics
- State Snapshots
- United States Health Information Knowledgebase (USHIK)
- Data Sources Available from AHRQ
Search All Research Studies
Topics
- Cancer (1)
- Cancer: Prostate Cancer (1)
- Cardiovascular Conditions (2)
- Care Management (1)
- (-) Comparative Effectiveness (4)
- (-) Evidence-Based Practice (4)
- Healthcare Delivery (1)
- Heart Disease and Health (1)
- Outcomes (1)
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (4)
- Prevention (2)
- Primary Care (2)
- Primary Care: Models of Care (1)
- Quality Improvement (2)
- (-) Quality of Care (4)
- Quality of Life (1)
- Research Methodologies (1)
- Surgery (1)
AHRQ Research Studies
Sign up: AHRQ Research Studies Email updates
Research Studies is a compilation of published research articles funded by AHRQ or authored by AHRQ researchers.
Results
1 to 4 of 4 Research Studies DisplayedReisz PA, Laviana AA, Zhao Z
Assessing the quality of surgical care for clinically localized prostate cancer: results from the CEASAR study.
Prior studies suggest that nationally endorsed quality measures for prostate cancer care are not linked closely with outcomes. Using a prospective, population based cohort the investigators measured clinically relevant variation in structure, process and outcome measures in men undergoing radical prostatectomy. The authors did not identify and meaningful variation in quality of care across racial groups, age groups and surgeon volume strata, in this cohort, suggesting that men were receiving comparable quality of care across these strata.
AHRQ-funded; HS019356.
Citation: Reisz PA, Laviana AA, Zhao Z .
Assessing the quality of surgical care for clinically localized prostate cancer: results from the CEASAR study.
J Urol 2020 Dec;204(6):1236-41. doi: 10.1097/ju.0000000000001198..
Keywords: Surgery, Cancer: Prostate Cancer, Cancer, Quality of Care, Quality of Life, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice
Persell SD, Liss DT, Walunas TL
Effects of 2 forms of practice facilitation on cardiovascular prevention in primary care: a practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness trial.
Effective quality improvement (QI) strategies are needed for small practices. The objective of this study was to compare practice facilitation implementing point-of-care (POC) QI strategies alone versus facilitation implementing point-of-care plus population management (POC+PM) strategies on preventive cardiovascular care. The investigators concluded that facilitator-led QI promoting population management approaches plus POC improvement strategies was not clearly superior to POC strategies alone.
AHRQ-funded; HS023921.
Citation: Persell SD, Liss DT, Walunas TL .
Effects of 2 forms of practice facilitation on cardiovascular prevention in primary care: a practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness trial.
.
Keywords: Cardiovascular Conditions, Prevention, Primary Care: Models of Care, Primary Care, Comparative Effectiveness, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Improvement, Quality of Care, Care Management, Healthcare Delivery
Ciolino JD, Jackson KL, Liss DT
Design of Healthy Hearts in the Heartland (H3): a practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study.
The Healthy Hearts in the Heartland (H3) study is part of a nationwide effort, EvidenceNOW, seeking to better understand the ability of small primary care practices to improve "ABCS" clinical quality measures: appropriate Aspirin therapy, Blood pressure control, Cholesterol management, and Smoking cessation. In this paper, the authors describe the design and randomization of the H3 study.
AHRQ-funded; HS023921.
Citation: Ciolino JD, Jackson KL, Liss DT .
Design of Healthy Hearts in the Heartland (H3): a practice-randomized, comparative effectiveness study.
Contemp Clin Trials 2018 Aug;71:47-54. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2018.06.004..
Keywords: Cardiovascular Conditions, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Heart Disease and Health, Prevention, Primary Care, Quality of Care, Quality Improvement, Outcomes, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Ansari MT
Grading the strength of a body of evidence when assessing health care interventions: an EPC update.
The authors discussed the state of revision of 2010 guidance on grading the strength of evidence (SOE) of the effectiveness of drugs, devices, and other preventive and therapeutic interventions in systematic reviews produced by AHRQ's Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) program. They concluded that EPC working groups will consider ongoing challenges and modify guidance as needed, on issues such as combining trials and observational studies in bodies of evidence, weighting domains, and combining qualitative and quantitative syntheses.
AHRQ-funded; 290200710056I.
Citation: Berkman ND, Lohr KN, Ansari MT .
Grading the strength of a body of evidence when assessing health care interventions: an EPC update.
J Clin Epidemiol 2015 Nov;68(11):1312-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.023.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Quality of Care, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies