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
- Cancer (1)
- Cancer: Colorectal Cancer (1)
- Colonoscopy (1)
- (-) Comparative Effectiveness (17)
- Data (1)
- Evidence-Based Practice (11)
- Guidelines (2)
- Imaging (1)
- Kidney Disease and Health (1)
- Medicare (1)
- Medication (2)
- Outcomes (3)
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (5)
- Policy (1)
- (-) Research Methodologies (17)
- Training (1)
- Treatments (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 17 of 17 Research Studies DisplayedLou Y, Cao J, Zhang S
Sample size calculations for time-averaged difference of longitudinal binary outcomes.
In this study, the researchers investigated sample size calculation for the comparison of time-averaged responses between treatment groups in clinical trials with longitudinally observed binary outcomes. Their simulation showed that the nominal power and type I error are well preserved over a wide range of design parameters. The researchers believe that theirs is the first study to consider the mixture of missing patterns in sample size calculation.
AHRQ-funded; HS022418.
Citation: Lou Y, Cao J, Zhang S .
Sample size calculations for time-averaged difference of longitudinal binary outcomes.
Commun Stat Theory Methods 2017;46(1):344-53. doi: 10.1080/03610926.2014.991040.
.
.
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Comparative Effectiveness, Outcomes
Butler M, Epstein RA, Totten A
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 3: adapting frameworks to develop protocols.
This article identifies and describes elements of frameworks and how they can be adapted to inform the protocol and conduct of systematic reviews of complex interventions. Possible approaches to analytic frameworks for complex interventions that illustrate causal and associative linkages are outlined, including time elements, which systematic reviews of complex interventions may need to address.
AHRQ-funded; 290201200004C; 290201500008I; 290201500005I; 290201500006I; 290201500010I.
Citation: Butler M, Epstein RA, Totten A .
AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 3: adapting frameworks to develop protocols.
J Clin Epidemiol 2017 Oct;90:19-27. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.013.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Braun D, Gorfine M, Parmigiani G
Propensity scores with misclassified treatment assignment: a likelihood-based adjustment.
The researchers show that misclassification of treatment assignment can impact three distinct stages of a propensity score analysis. They examine how error in the treatment assignment impacts each stage in the context of three common propensity score implementations: subclassification, matching, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). They propose a two-step likelihood-based approach which fully adjusts for treatment misclassification bias under subclassification
AHRQ-funded; HS021991.
Citation: Braun D, Gorfine M, Parmigiani G .
Propensity scores with misclassified treatment assignment: a likelihood-based adjustment.
Biostatistics 2017 Oct 1;18(4):695-710. doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxx014.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Landsittel DP, Kessler L, Schmid CH
Training in patient-centered outcomes research for specific researcher communities.
A number of publications have discussed approaches to training the scientific workforce in comparative effectiveness research (CER) and patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR). To extend these efforts into specific researcher communities, the AHRQ developed a Funding Opportunity Announcement that called for training for a specific researcher community in collaboration with associated program partners. This paper describes the strategies developed by the 5 subsequently funded programs, and the challenges associated with developing in-person and online programs.
AHRQ-funded; HS023214; HS023199; HS023299; HS023207; HS023185.
Citation: Landsittel DP, Kessler L, Schmid CH .
Training in patient-centered outcomes research for specific researcher communities.
J Clin Transl Sci 2017 Oct;1(5):278-84. doi: 10.1017/cts.2017.307.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies, Training
Garcia-Albeniz X, Hsu J, Hernan MA
The value of explicitly emulating a target trial when using real world evidence: an application to colorectal cancer screening.
Researchers reviewed a recent observational analysis that explicitly emulated a target trial of screening colonoscopy using insurance claims from U.S. Medicare. They then compared this explicit emulation with alternative, simpler observational analyses. This empirical comparison suggests that lack of an explicit emulation of the target trial leads to biased estimates, and shows that allowing for repeated eligibility increases the statistical efficiency of the estimates.
AHRQ-funded; HS023128.
Citation: Garcia-Albeniz X, Hsu J, Hernan MA .
The value of explicitly emulating a target trial when using real world evidence: an application to colorectal cancer screening.
Eur J Epidemiol 2017 Jun;32(6):495-500. doi: 10.1007/s10654-017-0287-2.
.
.
Keywords: Cancer: Colorectal Cancer, Colonoscopy, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Zhang S, Cao J, Ahn C
Inference and sample size calculation for clinical trials with incomplete observations of paired binary outcomes.
The researchers investigated the estimation of intervention effect and sample size determination for experiments where subjects are supposed to contribute paired binary outcomes with some incomplete observations. They theoretically prove that if incomplete data are evenly distributed between the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods, the proposed estimator will always be more efficient than the traditional estimator.
AHRQ-funded; HS022418.
Citation: Zhang S, Cao J, Ahn C .
Inference and sample size calculation for clinical trials with incomplete observations of paired binary outcomes.
Stat Med 2017 Feb 20;36(4):581-91. doi: 10.1002/sim.7168.
.
.
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Treatments, Comparative Effectiveness
Wang WJ, Robertson JC, Basu A
Burden of illness and research investments in translational sciences for pharmaceuticals in metastatic cancers.
This study explored whether investments in translational sciences for six metastatic cancers follow idiosyncratic returns to those investments rather than levels of burden of illness (BI). It concluded that investments in trials were positively associated only with contemporary changes in BI (2008-2014). The relationship was stronger for government-sponsored comparative-effectiveness trials than for industry.
AHRQ-funded; HS022982.
Citation: Wang WJ, Robertson JC, Basu A .
Burden of illness and research investments in translational sciences for pharmaceuticals in metastatic cancers.
J Comp Eff Res 2017 Jan;6(1):15-24. doi: 10.2217/cer-2016-0021.
.
.
Keywords: Cancer, Comparative Effectiveness, Medication, Research Methodologies
Boland MR, Rusanov A, So Y
From expert-derived user needs to user-perceived ease of use and usefulness: a two-phase mixed-methods evaluation framework.
This paper presents a two-phase evaluation framework involving usability experts (phase 1) and end-users (phase 2). In phase 1, a cross-system functionality alignment between expert-derived user needs and system functions was performed to inform the choice of ‘‘the best available’’ comparison system to enable a cognitive walkthrough in phase 1 and a comparative effectiveness evaluation in phase 2.
AHRQ-funded; HS019853.
Citation: Boland MR, Rusanov A, So Y .
From expert-derived user needs to user-perceived ease of use and usefulness: a two-phase mixed-methods evaluation framework.
J Biomed Inform 2014 Dec;52:141-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2013.12.004..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Viswanathan M, Carey TS, Belinson SE
AHRQ Author: Berliner E, Chang SM
A proposed approach may help systematic reviews retain needed expertise while minimizing bias from nonfinancial conflicts of interest.
The researchers sought to create practical guidance on ensuring adequate clinical or content expertise while maintaining independence of judgment on systematic review teams. They discussed their approach and concluded that the feasibility and utility of this approach to ensuring needed expertise on systematic reviews and minimizing bias from nonfinancial conflicts of interest must be investigated.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Viswanathan M, Carey TS, Belinson SE .
A proposed approach may help systematic reviews retain needed expertise while minimizing bias from nonfinancial conflicts of interest.
J Clin Epidemiol 2014 Nov;67(11):1229-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.02.023.
.
.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Jalbert JJ, Ritchey ME, Mi X
Methodological considerations in observational comparative effectiveness research for implantable medical devices: an epidemiologic perspective.
This article discusses some of the most salient issues encountered in conducting comparative effectiveness research on implantable devices. Included in this discussion are special methodological considerations regarding the use of data sources, exposure and outcome definitions, timing of exposure, and sources of bias.
AHRQ-funded; 29020050016; HS017731
Citation: Jalbert JJ, Ritchey ME, Mi X .
Methodological considerations in observational comparative effectiveness research for implantable medical devices: an epidemiologic perspective.
Am J Epidemiol. 2014 Nov 1;180(9):949-58. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwu206..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Research Methodologies, Data
Cook EA, Schneider KM, Robinson J
Field methods in medical record abstraction: assessing the properties of comparative effectiveness estimates.
Comparative effectiveness studies using Medicare claims data are vulnerable to treatment selection biases and supplemental data from a sample of patients has been recommended for examining the magnitude of this bias. The investigators collected medical record data from a subsample of patients to assess the validity of assumptions and to aid in the interpretation of our estimates. In this paper, they sought to describe and document the process used to collect and validate this supplemental information.
AHRQ-funded; HS018381.
Citation: Cook EA, Schneider KM, Robinson J .
Field methods in medical record abstraction: assessing the properties of comparative effectiveness estimates.
BMC Health Serv Res 2014 Sep 15;14:391. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-391..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Medicare, Evidence-Based Practice, 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
Garabedian LF, Chu P, Toh S
Potential bias of instrumental variable analyses for observational comparative effectiveness research.
Results of instrumental variable analyses may be biased if the instrument and outcome are related through an unadjusted third variable, an instrument-outcome confounder. The authors review of 187 comparative effectiveness studies using this type of analysis, only 4 considered potential instrument-outcome confounders outside the study data.
AHRQ-funded; 290050016I
Citation: Garabedian LF, Chu P, Toh S .
Potential bias of instrumental variable analyses for observational comparative effectiveness research.
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Jul 15;161(2):131-8. doi: 10.7326/M13-1887..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Outcomes, Research Methodologies
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
Valencia V, Moghadassi M, Kriesel DR
Study of Tomography Of Nephrolithiasis Evaluation (STONE): methodology, approach and rationale.
This paper describes the rationale and methods of STONE (Study of Tomography Of Nephrolithiasis Evaluation), a pragmatic randomized comparative effectiveness trial comparing different imaging strategies for patients with suspected urolithiasis. It concluded that the detailed methodology of STONE will provide a roadmap for comparative effectiveness studies of diagnostic imaging conducted in an ED setting.
AHRQ-funded; HS019312.
Citation: Valencia V, Moghadassi M, Kriesel DR .
Study of Tomography Of Nephrolithiasis Evaluation (STONE): methodology, approach and rationale.
Contemp Clin Trials 2014 May;38(1):92-101. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2014.03.006..
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Imaging, Kidney Disease and Health, 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
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