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
- Behavioral Health (2)
- Children/Adolescents (1)
- Comparative Effectiveness (10)
- Depression (1)
- (-) Evidence-Based Practice (27)
- Guidelines (4)
- Healthcare Delivery (2)
- Health Services Research (HSR) (6)
- Implementation (2)
- Medicare (1)
- Medication (1)
- Outcomes (1)
- Patient-Centered Healthcare (1)
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (9)
- Patient and Family Engagement (1)
- Policy (2)
- Prevention (1)
- Primary Care (2)
- Registries (1)
- (-) Research Methodologies (27)
- U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) (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 25 of 27 Research Studies DisplayedSaldanha IJ, Adam GP, Bañez LL
AHRQ Author: Bañez LL
Inclusion of nonrandomized studies of interventions in systematic reviews of interventions: updated guidance from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality Effective Health Care program.
A guidance workgroup comprised systematic review experts utilized an informal consensus generation method to develop guidelines to inform decisions regarding the inclusion of nonrandomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) in systematic reviews (SRs) of the effects of interventions. The study found that varying topics may require varying decisions regarding NRSI inclusion. The researchers identified key considerations to inform the decisions; from refinement of topics through to development of protocols. During the scoping and refinement of topics, considerations were associated with the clinical decisional dilemma, adequacy of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to address the crucial questions, risk of bias in NRSIs, and the degree to which NRSIs are likely to complement RCTs. When NRSIs are included, during SR team formation, familiarity with topic-specific data sources and advanced analytic methods for NRSIs should be considered. During protocol development, the decision regarding NRSI inclusion or exclusion should be justified, and potential implications explained. When NRSIs are included, the protocol should describe the processes for synthesizing evidence from RCTs and NRSIs and determining the overall strength of evidence. CONCLUSION: We identified specific considerations for decisions regarding NRSI inclusion in SRs and highlight the importance of flexibility and transparency.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290-2017-00003 -C; 75Q80120D00001- 75Q8120D00003; 75Q80120D00005 - 75Q8120D00009.
Citation: Saldanha IJ, Adam GP, Bañez LL .
Inclusion of nonrandomized studies of interventions in systematic reviews of interventions: updated guidance from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality Effective Health Care program.
J Clin Epidemiol 2022 Dec; 152:300-06. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.08.015..
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Health Services Research (HSR)
Adam GP, Pappas D, Papageorgiou H
A novel tool that allows interactive screening of PubMed citations showed promise for the semi-automation of identification of biomedical literature.
This study looked at a novel tool named Pythia that allows interactive screening of PubMed citations to provide semi-automation of identification of biomedical literature for use with systematic reviews. Pythia incorporates a set of natural-language questions with machine-learning algorithms to rank all PubMed citations based on relevance, returning the 100 top-ranked citations. Of the seven systematic reviews conducted, the number of abstracts reviewed per relevant abstract number needed to read was lower than in the manually screened project in four reviews, higher in two, and had mixed results in one. The reviews that had greater overall sensitivity retrieved more relevant citations in early batches, but retrieval was generally unaffected by other aspects, such as study design, study size, and specific key question.
AHRQ-funded; HS027247.
Citation: Adam GP, Pappas D, Papageorgiou H .
A novel tool that allows interactive screening of PubMed citations showed promise for the semi-automation of identification of biomedical literature.
J Clin Epidemiol 2022 Oct;150:63-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.06.007..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice
Oatis CA, Konnyu KJ, Franklin PD
Generating consistent longitudinal real-world data to support research: lessons from physical therapists.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether clinicians can generate consistent and standardized real-world data (RWD) to enhance data quality in the course of routine patient care. The researchers collaborated with PT clinicians and experts to generate a web-based comprehensive system to quantify the total dose of PT interventions with type of modality, quantity, intensity, and progressions over time. The system was designed to be implemented in outpatient PT clinics capable of residing alongside or within a clinic’s existing EHR. The study goal was to collect routine clinical data in a format useable by the general population of outpatient physical therapists treating patients post Total Knee Replacement (TKR) and in a structure that would allow easy quantification and analysis across patients, therapists, and sites. Uniform and efficient documentation of real-world PT practice following TKR is essential for the necessary comparative effectiveness research demanded by the currently unexplained practice variation. Over a period of 2 years, physical therapists and PT assistants located in three US states entered data for a total of 161 patients post TKR with 2615 patient visits. No technical problems with the data capture system were reported, and physical therapists noted that data entry was efficient and simple. The researchers concluded that the results demonstrate that routine PT interventions can be captured thoroughly in an efficient, systematic, and consistent manner across real-world therapists and sites.
AHRQ-funded; 75Q80120D00001.
Citation: Oatis CA, Konnyu KJ, Franklin PD .
Generating consistent longitudinal real-world data to support research: lessons from physical therapists.
ACR Open Rheumatol 2022 Sep;4(9):771-74. doi: 10.1002/acr2.11465..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Evidence-Based Practice
Kumamaru H, Jalbert JJ, Nguyen LL
Utility of automated data-adaptive propensity score method for confounding by indication in comparative effectiveness study in real world Medicare and registry data.
The authors assessed the utility of an automated data-adaptive analytic approach for confounding adjustment when both claims and clinical registry data are available. Using a comparative study example of carotid artery stenting vs. carotid endarterectomy with strong confounding by indication, they found that the automated data-adaptive propensity score performed better than the investigator-specified propensity score in general, but both claims and registry data were needed to adequately control for bias.
AHRQ-funded; 29020050016I.
Citation: Kumamaru H, Jalbert JJ, Nguyen LL .
Utility of automated data-adaptive propensity score method for confounding by indication in comparative effectiveness study in real world Medicare and registry data.
PLoS One 2022 Aug;17(8):e0272975. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272975..
Keywords: Registries, Comparative Effectiveness, Research Methodologies, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Evidence-Based Practice
Djulbegovic B, Ahmed MM, Hozo I
High quality (certainty) evidence changes less often than low-quality evidence, but the magnitude of effect size does not systematically differ between studies with low versus high-quality evidence.
The study researchers state that assumptions and general beliefs exist about certainty of evidence (CoE) and its impact on estimates of treatment effects, however empirical assessment of those assumptions and beliefs is lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences between low CoE (low-quality evidence) and high CoE (high-quality evidence) in precision of estimating treatment effects. The researchers reviewed the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 2016 through May 2021 for pairs of original and updated reviews for change in CoE assessments based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method. Differences in effect sizes between the original reviews and the updated reviews were assessed as a function of change in CoE. The researchers concluded that low CoE changes more frequently than high CoE, but the effect size in low CoE studies did not differ from the effect size in high CoE studies. The researchers state that the effect size finding is an indicator of the need to further assess and improve the critical appraisal methods currently utilized in evidence-based medicine.
AHRQ-funded; HS024917.
Citation: Djulbegovic B, Ahmed MM, Hozo I .
High quality (certainty) evidence changes less often than low-quality evidence, but the magnitude of effect size does not systematically differ between studies with low versus high-quality evidence.
J Eval Clin Pract 2022 Jun;28(3):353-62. doi: 10.1111/jep.13657..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice
Callejo-Black A, Wagner DV, Ramanujam K
A systematic review of external validity in pediatric integrated primary care trials.
This study used the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework to conduct a systematic review of external validity reporting in integrated primary care (IPC) interventions for mental health concerns. A literature search was conducted to identify relevant literature from 1998 to 2018 reporting on open, randomized or quasi-randomized trials of IPC interventions that targeted child (ages 0-18 years) psychological symptoms. The authors included 39 publications describing 25 studies in the review. Publications rarely reported indicators of external validity, including the representatives of participants (12%), rate of adoption clinics or providers (16%), cost of implementation (8%), or evidence of maintenance (16%). Few studies also included key pragmatic factors such as cost or organizational change processes related to implementation and maintenance.
AHRQ-funded; HS022981.
Citation: Callejo-Black A, Wagner DV, Ramanujam K .
A systematic review of external validity in pediatric integrated primary care trials.
J Pediatr Psychol 2020 Oct 1;45(9):1039-52. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsaa068..
Keywords: Children/Adolescents, Primary Care, Behavioral Health, Healthcare Delivery, Evidence-Based Practice, Health Services Research (HSR), Research Methodologies
Cuthel A, Rogers E, Daniel F
Barriers and facilitators in the recruitment and retention of more than 250 small independent primary care practices for EvidenceNOW.
This study examined barriers and facilitators in the recruitment and retention of small independent practices (SIPs) to participate in research studies. The authors used qualitative data from the HealthyHearts New York City program, part of the EvidenceNOW initiative. This randomized controlled trial took place from 2015 through 2018 across 5 boroughs in NYC. A total of 257 SIPs (<5 full-time clinicians) were recruited originally. The three main factors that facilitated rapid recruitment were: 1) a prior well-established relationship with the local health department; 2) alignment of project goals with practice priorities, and 3) having appropriate monetary incentives. Specific strategies that enhance recruitment of SIPS and fills gaps in knowledge about factors that influence retention are identified.
AHRQ-funded; HS023922.
Citation: Cuthel A, Rogers E, Daniel F .
Barriers and facilitators in the recruitment and retention of more than 250 small independent primary care practices for EvidenceNOW.
Am J Med Qual 2020 Sep/Oct;35(5):388-96. doi: 10.1177/1062860619893422..
Keywords: Primary Care, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Research Methodologies
Landes SJ, Kerns SEU, Pilar MR
Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2019: where the rubber meets the road: the intersection of research, policy, and practice - part 1.
This paper offers a compilation of the abstracts of the oral and poster presentations from the 2019 Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) Conference entitled “Where the Rubber Meets the Road: The Intersection of Research, Policy, and Practice” held in Seattle from 12-14 September. The society had evolved following a NIMH-funded conference grant and is now an international society. The conference included 432 attendees. Highlights of the conference are described.
AHRQ-funded; HS025632.
Citation: Landes SJ, Kerns SEU, Pilar MR .
Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2019: where the rubber meets the road: the intersection of research, policy, and practice - part 1.
Implement Sci 2020 Sep 30;15(Suppl 3):76. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01034-7..
Keywords: Implementation, Health Services Research (HSR), Evidence-Based Practice, Policy, Research Methodologies
Riggs K, Richman J, Kertesz S
Trial design for ineffectiveness research: a mixed-methods survey.
High-quality research demonstrating a lack of effectiveness may facilitate the 'de-adoption' of ineffective health services. However, there has been little debate on the optimal design for ineffectiveness research-studies exploring the research hypothesis that an intervention is ineffective. The aim of this study was to explore investigators' preferences for trial design for ineffectiveness research. The investigators conducted a mixed-methods online survey with principle investigators identified from clinicaltrials.gov.
AHRQ-funded; HS023009.
Citation: Riggs K, Richman J, Kertesz S .
Trial design for ineffectiveness research: a mixed-methods survey.
BMJ Evid Based Med 2020 Aug;25(4):143-44. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111276..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice
Lin D, Lapen K, Sherer MV
A systematic review of contouring guidelines in radiation oncology: analysis of frequency, methodology, and delivery of consensus recommendations.
Clinical trials have described variation in radiation therapy plan quality, of which contour delineation is a key component, and linked this to inferior patient outcomes. In response, consensus guidelines have been developed to standardize contour delineation. This investigation assessed trends in contouring guidelines and examined the methodologies used to generate and deliver recommendations. The investigators concluded that this review highlighted an increase in consensus contouring recommendations over time.
AHRQ-funded; HS026881.
Citation: Lin D, Lapen K, Sherer MV .
A systematic review of contouring guidelines in radiation oncology: analysis of frequency, methodology, and delivery of consensus recommendations.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020 Jul 15;107(4):827-35. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.04.011..
Keywords: Guidelines, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Thomas LE, Yang S, Wojdyla D
Matching with time-dependent treatments: a review and look forward.
Observational studies of treatment effects attempt to mimic a randomized experiment by balancing the covariate distribution in treated and control groups, thus removing biases related to measured confounders. In this paper, the authors define a class of longitudinal matching methods and provide a review of existing variations, with guidance regarding study design, execution, and analysis. They identify avenues for future research and highlight the relevance of this methodology to high-quality comparative effectiveness studies in the era of big data.
AHRQ-funded; HS24310.
Citation: Thomas LE, Yang S, Wojdyla D .
Matching with time-dependent treatments: a review and look forward.
Stat Med 2020 Jul;39(17):2350-70. doi: 10.1002/sim.8533..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice, Comparative Effectiveness
Tsou AY, Treadwell JR, Erinoff E
Machine learning for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: comparative performance of Abstrackr and EPPI-Reviewer.
Improving the speed of systematic review (SR) development is key to supporting evidence-based medicine. Machine learning tools which semi-automate citation screening might improve efficiency. Few studies have assessed use of screening prioritization functionality or compared two tools head to head. In this project, the investigators compared performance of two machine-learning tools for potential use in citation screening.
AHRQ-funded; HS025859.
Citation: Tsou AY, Treadwell JR, Erinoff E .
Machine learning for screening prioritization in systematic reviews: comparative performance of Abstrackr and EPPI-Reviewer.
Syst Rev 2020 Apr 2;9(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01324-7..
Keywords: Health Services Research (HSR), Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Krist AH, Barry MJ, Wolff TA
AHRQ Author: Wolff TA, Fan TM
Evolution of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's methods.
In this commentary on an article appearing in the same issue, the authors stated that the methods used by the USPSTF deliberately set a high bar for making evidence-based recommendations. They indicated that consumers of preventive service guidelines need to know concretely what is known and unknown and further need confidence that what is being recommended is not influenced by economic or political pressures or by professional opinion with a limited evidence basis.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Krist AH, Barry MJ, Wolff TA .
Evolution of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's methods.
Am J Prev Med 2020 Mar;58(3):332-35. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.11.003..
Keywords: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Guidelines, Evidence-Based Practice, Prevention, Research Methodologies
Byham-Gray LD, Peters EN, Rothpletz-Puglia P
Patient-centered model for protein-energy wasting: stakeholder deliberative panels.
Integrating the patient's voice into research prioritization is essential for solving problems that patients care the most about in terms of health, symptom management, and survival. In this study, the investigators used deliberative processes for adapting the existing model of protein-energy wasting (PEW) to one that included stakeholder priorities, addressing gaps from the initial concept.
AHRQ-funded; HS023434.
Citation: Byham-Gray LD, Peters EN, Rothpletz-Puglia P .
Patient-centered model for protein-energy wasting: stakeholder deliberative panels.
J Ren Nutr 2020 Mar;30(2):137-44. doi: 10.1053/j.jrn.2019.06.001..
Keywords: Patient-Centered Healthcare, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient and Family Engagement, Research Methodologies
Gaynes BN, Lux L, Gartlehner G
Defining treatment-resistant depression.
The authors conducted a review for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and AHRQ to clarify how experts and investigators have defined treatment-resistant depression (TRD) and to review systematically how well this definition comports with TRD definitions in clinical trials through July 5, 2019. They found that no consensus definition existed for TRD. While depressive outcomes and clinical global impressions were commonly measured, functional impairment and quality-of-life tools were rarely used. They recommend stronger approaches to designing and conducting TRD research in order to foster better evidence to translate into clearer guidelines for treating patients with TRD.
AHRQ-funded; 290201500011I.
Citation: Gaynes BN, Lux L, Gartlehner G .
Defining treatment-resistant depression.
Depress Anxiety 2020 Feb;37(2):134-45. doi: 10.1002/da.22968..
Keywords: Depression, Behavioral Health, Evidence-Based Practice, Implementation, Research Methodologies
Lin L, Shi L, Chu H
The magnitude of small-study effects in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an empirical study of nearly 30 000 meta-analyses.
The authors’ goal was to provide rules of thumb for interpreting measures to quantify small-study effects' magnitude. They used six measures to evaluate small-study effects in 29,932 meta-analyses from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. They presented the empirical distributions of the six measures and proposed a rough guide to interpret the measures' magnitude. They suggested that their proposed rules of thumb may help evidence users grade the certainty in evidence as impacted by small-study effects.
AHRQ-funded; HS024743.
Citation: Lin L, Shi L, Chu H .
The magnitude of small-study effects in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: an empirical study of nearly 30 000 meta-analyses.
BMJ Evid Based Med 2020 Feb;25(1):27-32. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111191..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice
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
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
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
Jaana M, Vartak S, Ward MM
Evidence-based health care management: what is the research evidence available for health care managers?
The authors conducted a scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses to determine the availability and accessibility of evidence for health care managers. They found that 96.5% of their search results were not on target, and they suggested a better classification within PubMed to increase the accessibility of meaningful resources and to facilitate evidence retrieval. They recommended that health care journals take initiatives encouraging the publication of reviews in relevant management areas.
AHRQ-funded; HS018396.
Citation: Jaana M, Vartak S, Ward MM .
Evidence-based health care management: what is the research evidence available for health care managers?
Eval Health Prof 2014 Sep;37(3):314-34. doi: 10.1177/0163278713511325.
.
.
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Health Services Research (HSR), 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
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
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
Boyd CM, Kent DM
Evidence-based medicine and the hard problem of multimorbidity.
In this article on evidence-based medicine and multimorbidity, the authors discuss the issue and assert that it remains to be determined whether sustained and concentrated attention will permit investigators to address the problem of multimorbidity using the “normal science” available with the tools of EBM, or whether such attention will produce the sort of crisis that is the first prerequisite for a new paradigm.
AHRQ-funded; HS017653; HS018597.
Citation: Boyd CM, Kent DM .
Evidence-based medicine and the hard problem of multimorbidity.
J Gen Intern Med 2014 Apr;29(4):552-3. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2658-z..
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies