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
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 DisplayedVolk RJ, Linder SK, Lopez-Olivo MA
Patient decision aids for colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
This systematic review describes studies evaluating patient decision aids for colorectal cancer screening in average-risk adults and their impact on knowledge, screening intentions, and uptake. It concluded that decision aids improve knowledge and interest in screening, and lead to increased screening over no information, but their impact on screening is similar to general colorectal cancer screening information.
AHRQ-funded; HS022134.
Citation: Volk RJ, Linder SK, Lopez-Olivo MA .
Patient decision aids for colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Am J Prev Med 2016 Nov;51(5):779-91. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.022.
.
.
Keywords: Cancer: Colorectal Cancer, Decision Making, Education: Patient and Caregiver, Healthcare Utilization, Screening
Pollack CE, Blackford AL, Schoenborn NL
Comparing prognostic tools for cancer screening: considerations for clinical practice and performance assessment.
The researchers compared the agreement and rates of cancer screening using four prognostic tools that require different types of clinical information. They found high agreement among the four prognostic tools. They concluded that the high rates of cancer screening of individuals with limited life expectancy suggest the importance of incorporating tools into clinical decision-making.
AHRQ-funded; HS000029.
Citation: Pollack CE, Blackford AL, Schoenborn NL .
Comparing prognostic tools for cancer screening: considerations for clinical practice and performance assessment.
J Am Geriatr Soc 2016 May;64(5):1032-8. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14089.
.
.
Keywords: Elderly, Cancer, Screening, Decision Making
Brenner AT, Gupta S, Ko LK
Development of a practical model for targeting patient decision support interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening in vulnerable populations.
The authors sought to develop a practical model for predicting probability of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening completion in a diverse safety-net population and a subsequent framework for targeting screening promotion interventions. Their model and framework may be useful for designing and delivering targeted interventions to promote CRC screening.
AHRQ-funded; HS013853.
Citation: Brenner AT, Gupta S, Ko LK .
Development of a practical model for targeting patient decision support interventions to promote colorectal cancer screening in vulnerable populations.
J Health Care Poor Underserved 2016;27(2):465-78. doi: 10.1353/hpu.2016.0090.
.
.
Keywords: Cancer: Colorectal Cancer, Decision Making, Health Promotion, Screening, Vulnerable Populations
Sheridan SL, Sutkowi-Hemstreet A, Barclay C
A comparative effectiveness trial of alternate formats for presenting benefits and harms information for low-value screening services: a randomized clinical trial.
The researchers examined the effect of different benefits and harms presentations on patients' intentions to accept low-value or potentially low-value screening services (prostate cancer screening in men ages 50-69 years; osteoporosis screening in low-risk women ages 50-64 years) They concluded that single, brief, written decision support interventions, such as the ones in this study, are unlikely to be sufficient to change intentions for screening.
AHRQ-funded; HS021133.
Citation: Sheridan SL, Sutkowi-Hemstreet A, Barclay C .
A comparative effectiveness trial of alternate formats for presenting benefits and harms information for low-value screening services: a randomized clinical trial.
JAMA Intern Med 2016 Jan;176(1):31-41. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.7339.
.
.
Keywords: Screening, Decision Making, Health Services Research (HSR), Prevention, Healthcare Utilization