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
AHRQ Research Studies Date
Topics
- Arthritis (2)
- Cancer (1)
- Comparative Effectiveness (8)
- Decision Making (1)
- Evidence-Based Practice (10)
- Healthcare Delivery (1)
- Health Services Research (HSR) (2)
- Implementation (1)
- Outcomes (3)
- Pain (2)
- Patient-Centered Healthcare (1)
- (-) Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (15)
- Quality of Care (1)
- Quality of Life (1)
- (-) Research Methodologies (15)
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 15 of 15 Research Studies DisplayedMcCarthy IM
Putting the patient in patient reported outcomes: a robust methodology for health outcomes assessment.
Through a series of Monte Carlo simulations, this paper illustrates that reliance solely on the summary score may lead to biased estimates of incremental effects, and proposes a novel two-stage approach that allows for unbiased estimation of incremental effects. The proposed methodology essentially reverses the order of the analysis, from one of 'aggregate, then estimate' to one of 'estimate, then aggregate'.
AHRQ-funded; HS022431.
Citation: McCarthy IM .
Putting the patient in patient reported outcomes: a robust methodology for health outcomes assessment.
Health Econ 2015 Dec;24(12):1588-603. doi: 10.1002/hec.3113.
.
.
Keywords: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Outcomes, Quality of Life, Research Methodologies
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
Christensen R, Maxwell LJ, Juni P
Consensus on the need for a hierarchical list of patient-reported pain Outcomes for Metaanalyses of Knee Osteoarthritis Trials: An OMERACT Objective.
A group of international experts convened to address issues regarding the need to develop hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments for a particular outcome for metaanalyses. After discussions, most participants agreed that there is a need to develop a methodology for generation of hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments to guide metaanalyses.
AHRQ-funded; HS021110.
Citation: Christensen R, Maxwell LJ, Juni P .
Consensus on the need for a hierarchical list of patient-reported pain Outcomes for Metaanalyses of Knee Osteoarthritis Trials: An OMERACT Objective.
J Rheumatol 2015 Oct;42(10):1971-75. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.141384..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Arthritis, Pain, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Dusetzina SB, Brookhart MA, Maciejewski ML
Control outcomes and exposures for improving internal validity of nonrandomized studies.
The authors review examples of control outcomes and exposures from prior studies and provide recommendations for conducting and reporting these analyses. They found that there is inconsistent terminology for these concepts, making study identification challenging. They recommend that the rigor of nonrandomized studies can be improved with inclusion of control outcomes and exposures for bias detection.
AHRQ-funded; HS023099; HS023085.
Citation: Dusetzina SB, Brookhart MA, Maciejewski ML .
Control outcomes and exposures for improving internal validity of nonrandomized studies.
Health Serv Res 2015 Oct;50(5):1432-51. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12279..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Outcomes
Whicher DM, Miller JE, Dunham KM
Gatekeepers for pragmatic clinical trials.
The authors provided a framework to help guide gatekeepers' decision-making related to the use of resources for pragmatic clinical trials. They stated that recognition of the complex set of considerations that should inform decision-making will guide gatekeepers in making justifiable choices regarding the use of limited and valuable resources.
AHRQ-funded; HS000029.
Citation: Whicher DM, Miller JE, Dunham KM .
Gatekeepers for pragmatic clinical trials.
Clin Trials 2015 Oct;12(5):442-8. doi: 10.1177/1740774515597699.
.
.
Keywords: Decision Making, Evidence-Based Practice, Comparative Effectiveness, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Busse JW, Bartlett SJ, Dougados M
Optimal strategies for reporting pain in clinical trials and systematic reviews: recommendations from an OMERACT 12 Workshop.
A group of international experts convened to address issues regarding the need to develop hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments for a particular outcome for metaanalyses. After discussions, most participants agreed that there is a need to develop a methodology for generation of hierarchical lists of outcome measurement instruments to guide metaanalyses.
AHRQ-funded; HS021110.
Citation: Busse JW, Bartlett SJ, Dougados M .
Optimal strategies for reporting pain in clinical trials and systematic reviews: recommendations from an OMERACT 12 Workshop.
J Rheumatol 2015 Oct;42(10):1962-70. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.141440..
Keywords: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Arthritis, Research Methodologies, Pain
Whicher D, Kass N, Faden R
Stakeholders' views of alternatives to prospective informed consent for minimal-risk pragmatic comparative effectiveness trials.
This paper reports on interviews with Institutional Review Board members and researchers and on focus groups with patients from Geisinger and Johns Hopkins health systems, with the objective of eliciting participants' views of the acceptability of four different disclosure and authorization models for low-risk pragmatic comparative effectiveness trials of widely-used therapies. Results suggested that many participants believed that it was acceptable to streamline information disclosure and to use an opt-out process for eligible individuals who would prefer not to participate.
AHRQ-funded; HS021064.
Citation: Whicher D, Kass N, Faden R .
Stakeholders' views of alternatives to prospective informed consent for minimal-risk pragmatic comparative effectiveness trials.
J Law Med Ethics 2015 Summer;43(2):397-409. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12256.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Cottrell EK, Whitlock EP, Kato E
AHRQ Author: Kato E
Defining the benefits and challenges of stakeholder engagement in systematic reviews.
The researchers examined the following questions: 1) what are the expected benefits of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews, and 2) what are the perceived challenges of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews? Using a literature scan and series of key informant interviews, they identified expected benefits such as establishing credibility and anticipating controversy. Challenges included time, training, resources and finding the right people.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290201200004C
Citation: Cottrell EK, Whitlock EP, Kato E .
Defining the benefits and challenges of stakeholder engagement in systematic reviews.
Comp Eff Rev. 2015 Apr;5:13-19..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Gerber DE, Pruitt SL, Halm EA
Should criteria for inclusion in cancer clinical trials be expanded?
The authors argue that the time is right to take a more evidence-based approach to assessing the validity of many traditional exclusion criteria for cancer clinical trials. Furthermore, for investigators, it is critically important that their selection of inclusion and exclusion criteria be thoughtful, deliberate and justified. To accomplish this, they will need to use an array of methodological approaches to assess their validity and impact.
AHRQ-funded; HS022418.
Citation: Gerber DE, Pruitt SL, Halm EA .
Should criteria for inclusion in cancer clinical trials be expanded?
J Comp Eff Res 2015;4(4):289-91. doi: 10.2217/cer.15.27..
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Fleurence R, Whicher D, Dunham K
The Patient-centered Outcomes Research Institute's role in advancing methods for Patient-centered Outcomes Research.
The authors described PCORI’s legislatively mandated Methodology Committee and its Methodology Report; discussed PCORI’s current slate of CER methods projects; and shared some initial thoughts about future areas where further methods development is needed.
AHRQ-funded; HS000029.
Citation: Fleurence R, Whicher D, Dunham K .
The Patient-centered Outcomes Research Institute's role in advancing methods for Patient-centered Outcomes Research.
Med Care 2015 Jan;53(1):2-8. doi: 10.1097/mlr.0000000000000244.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Healthcare, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Guise JM, Chang C, Viswanathan M
AHRQ Author: Chang C, Berliner E
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods for systematically reviewing complex multicomponent health care interventions.
The purpose of this AHRQ EPC methods white paper was to outline approaches to conducting systematic reviews of complex multicomponent health care interventions. It provided a framework for synthesizing studies of multicomponent interventions and also provided an initial list of critical reporting elements for such studies in order to help systematic reviewers understand the options and tradeoffs available for such reviews.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290201200010I; 290201200012I; 290201200011I; 290201200015I; 290201200008I; 290201200004C.
Citation: Guise JM, Chang C, Viswanathan M .
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods for systematically reviewing complex multicomponent health care interventions.
J Clin Epidemiol 2014 Nov;67(11):1181-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.010.
.
.
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Healthcare Delivery, Health Services Research (HSR), Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Smith SR
AHRQ Author: Smith SR
Preface to the AHRQ supplement.
AHRQ, through its Developing Evidence to Inform Decisions about Effectiveness (DEcIDE) Research Network, sponsored this supplement to present various strategies in the design, analysis, and conduct of health outcomes studies relevant to rare diseases. The purpose of this supplement is to disseminate illustrative examples of research methods that can be applied to understand health outcomes and potentially to stimulate new patient-centered outcomes studies for rare diseases.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Smith SR .
Preface to the AHRQ supplement.
J Gen Intern Med 2014 Aug;29 Suppl 3:S712-3. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2922-x.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Outcomes, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Holzer JK, Ellis L, Merritt MW
Why we need community engagement in medical research.
The aim of this article was to illustrate how community engagement can help to remedy shortfalls of community trust, participant enrollment, and uptake of research findings. After briefly describing these shortfalls, the authors considered 3 case examples that demonstrate the potential of community engagement to address each. They also discussed the ethical importance and implications of demonstrating respect for the community.
AHRQ-funded; HS017589.
Citation: Holzer JK, Ellis L, Merritt MW .
Why we need community engagement in medical research.
J Investig Med 2014 Aug;62(6):851-5. doi: 10.1097/jim.0000000000000097..
Keywords: Health Services Research (HSR), Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies, Implementation
Tugwell P, Boers M, D'Agostino MA
Updating the OMERACT filter: implications of filter 2.0 to select outcome instruments through assessment of "truth": content, face, and construct validity.
Two discussion groups critically reviewed the variety of ways in which five case studies of current OMERACT Working Groups complied with the ‘Truth’ component of the Filter and what issues remained to be resolved. The case studies showed that there is broad agreement on criteria for meeting the ‘Truth’ criteria through demonstration of content, face and construct validity; however several issues were identified that the Filter Working Group will need to address.
AHRQ-funded; HS013852
Citation: Tugwell P, Boers M, D'Agostino MA .
Updating the OMERACT filter: implications of filter 2.0 to select outcome instruments through assessment of "truth": content, face, and construct validity.
J Rheumatol. 2014 May;41(5):1000-4. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.131310..
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Buckley DI, Ansari MT, Butler M
AHRQ Author: Chang CS
The refinement of topics for systematic reviews: lessons and recommendations from the Effective Health Care Program.
AHRQ convened a work group to assess approaches and develop recommendations for topic refinement for the Effective Health Care Program. They concluded that accurate, rigorous, and useful systematic reviews require well-refined topics, and the work group's guiding principles and methodological recommendations may help investigators refine topics for reviews.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Buckley DI, Ansari MT, Butler M .
The refinement of topics for systematic reviews: lessons and recommendations from the Effective Health Care Program.
J Clin Epidemiol 2014 Apr;67(4):425-32. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.023.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies