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
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 10 of 10 Research Studies DisplayedGuise JM, Chang C, Butler M
AHRQ Author: Chang C
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 1: an introduction to a series of articles that provide guidance and tools for reviews of complex interventions.
The seven articles in this series reflect and distill the discussions from the in-person meeting and follow-up workgroups on tools and approaches to systematic reviews of complex interventions. The first three articles address how systematic reviews for complex interventions are conceptualized and operationalized for the protocol. The next two articles discuss how to choose appropriate analytic methods to implement analyses of complex interventions. The final two articles describe proposed reporting elements for systematic reviews of complex interventions.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290201200004C; 290201200016I; 290201500011I.
Citation: Guise JM, Chang C, Butler M .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 1: an introduction to a series of articles that provide guidance and tools for reviews of complex interventions.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:6-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.011.
.
.
Keywords: Data, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies
Kelly MP, Noyes J, Kane RL
AHRQ Author: Chang C
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 2: defining complexity, formulating scope, and questions.
This paper builds on concepts introduced in paper 1 of this series. It describes the methodological, practical, and philosophical challenges and potential approaches for formulating the questions and scope of systematic reviews of complex interventions. Furthermore, it discusses the use of theory to help organize reviews of complex interventions.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290-2012-00004-C; 290-2015-00008I; 290-2015-00011I.
Citation: Kelly MP, Noyes J, Kane RL .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 2: defining complexity, formulating scope, and questions.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:11-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.012.
.
.
Keywords: Data, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies
Viswanathan M, McPheeters ML, Murad MH
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 4: selecting analytic approaches.
This article addresses the uncertainty that systematic reviewers face in selecting methods for reviews of complex interventions. Specifically, it lays out parameters for systematic reviewers to consider when selecting analytic approaches that best answer the questions at hand and suggests analytic techniques that may be appropriate in different circumstances.
AHRQ-funded; 290201200004C.
Citation: Viswanathan M, McPheeters ML, Murad MH .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 4: selecting analytic approaches.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:28-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.014.
.
.
Keywords: Data, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies
Pigott T, Noyes J, Umscheid CA
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 5: advanced analytic methods.
In this paper, the authors emphasize that the specific research question posed in the review should be used as a guide for choosing the appropriate analytic method. They present advanced analytic approaches that address some common questions that guide reviews of complex interventions such as: (1) How effective is the intervention? and (2) For whom does the intervention work and in what contexts?
AHRQ-funded; 290-2012-00004C; 290-2015-00005I; 290-2015-00004I; 290-2015-00009I; 290-2015-00013I; 290-2015-00011I; 290-2015-00003I.
Citation: Pigott T, Noyes J, Umscheid CA .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 5: advanced analytic methods.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:37-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.015.
.
.
Keywords: Shared Decision Making, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies
Guise JM, Butler ME, Chang C
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 6: PRISMA-CI extension statement and checklist.
This paper provides a stand-alone extension to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting tool for complex interventions-PRISMA-CI-to help authors, publishers, and readers understand and apply to systematic reviews of complex interventions. PRISMA-CI development followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research Network guidance for extensions and focused on adding or modifying only essential items.
AHRQ-funded; 290201200004C; 290201200016I; 290201500011I.
Citation: Guise JM, Butler ME, Chang C .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 6: PRISMA-CI extension statement and checklist.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:43-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.016.
.
.
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Guise JM, Butler M, Chang C
AHRQ Author: Chang C
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 7: PRISMA-CI elaboration and explanation.
The Complex Interventions Methods Workgroup developed an extension to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Complex Interventions (PRISMA-CI). Following the guidance for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extensions, this Explanation and Elaboration (EE) document accompanies the PRISMA-CI checklist to promote consistency in reporting of systematic reviews of complex interventions.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290201200004C; 290201200016I; 290201500011I.
Citation: Guise JM, Butler M, Chang C .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 7: PRISMA-CI elaboration and explanation.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:51-58. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.017.
.
.
Keywords: Data, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies
Cosgrove L, Shaughnessy AF, Peters SM
Conflicts of interest and the presence of methodologists on guideline development panels: a cross-sectional study of clinical practice guidelines for major depressive disorder.
The authors aimed to review treatment guidelines for major depressive disorder and assess the relationship between endorsement of antidepressants for mild depression as a first-line intervention and financial conflicts of interest of guideline panel members. They concluded that ensuring that guideline development groups are free of commercial ties and include individuals with methodological expertise provides an important safeguard – that an evidence-based review is applied at every stage, from the framing of the questions for review, to searching, evaluating, and synthesizing the evidence.
AHRQ-funded; HS022940.
Citation: Cosgrove L, Shaughnessy AF, Peters SM .
Conflicts of interest and the presence of methodologists on guideline development panels: a cross-sectional study of clinical practice guidelines for major depressive disorder.
Psychother Psychosom 2017;86(3):168-70. doi: 10.1159/000458727.
.
.
Keywords: Depression, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies
Bibbins-Domingo K, Whitlock E, Wolff T
AHRQ Author: Wolff T, Ngo-Metzger Q
Developing recommendations for evidence-based clinical preventive services for diverse populations: methods of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) summarizes the principles and considerations that guide development of its recommendations for diverse U.S. populations. It uses these principles through each step in the evidence-based guideline process: developing the research plan, conducting the evidence review, developing the recommendation, and communicating to guideline users. A comprehensive list of recommendations that includes considerations for specific populations is provided.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded.
Citation: Bibbins-Domingo K, Whitlock E, Wolff T .
Developing recommendations for evidence-based clinical preventive services for diverse populations: methods of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Ann Intern Med 2017 Apr 18;166(8):565-71. doi: 10.7326/m16-2656.
.
.
Keywords: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Evidence-Based Practice, Prevention, Research Methodologies, Guidelines
Camp KM, Parisi MA, Acosta PB
AHRQ Author: Chang CS
Phenylketonuria Scientific Review Conference: state of the science and future research needs.
An NIH State-of-the-Science Conference was convened in 2012 to address new findings, particularly the use of the medication sapropterin to treat some individuals with phenylketonuria (PKU), and to develop a research agenda. An AHRQ Evidence-based Practice Center conducted a systematic review of adjuvant treatments for PKU and presented its conclusions at the conference. New drugs that are safe, efficacious, and impact a larger proportion of individuals with PKU are needed. The identification of a research agenda has facilitated the development of clinical practice guidelines by professional organizations and serves as a model for other inborn errors of metabolism.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Camp KM, Parisi MA, Acosta PB .
Phenylketonuria Scientific Review Conference: state of the science and future research needs.
Mol Genet Metab 2014 Jun;112(2):87-122. doi: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2014.02.013.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Medication, Research Methodologies
Lawrence WF
AHRQ Author: Lawrence WF
Comparative effectiveness research in practice and policy for radiation oncology.
In radiation oncology, the line between comparative effectiveness research (CER) and traditional research may be blurred, but an increased emphasis on CER can help to bridge the research enterprise and clinical practice, helping to inform decision making at the patient, clinician, and policy levels.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Lawrence WF .
Comparative effectiveness research in practice and policy for radiation oncology.
Semin Radiat Oncol 2014 Jan;24(1):54-60. doi: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2013.09.001.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Policy, Research Methodologies