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 3 of 3 Research Studies DisplayedArmstrong MJ, Gronseth GS, Day GS
Patient stakeholder versus physician preferences regarding amyloid PET testing.
Patient and caregiver perspectives on amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) use are largely unexplored, particularly as compared with clinician views. In this study, the investigators surveyed clinicians, patients, caregivers, and dementia advocates on topics relating to an evidence-based guideline on amyloid PET use. They found that patients and caregivers emphasized the importance of having a dementia diagnosis and placed more value on testing and outcomes for asymptomatic populations than clinicians.
AHRQ-funded; HS024159.
Citation: Armstrong MJ, Gronseth GS, Day GS .
Patient stakeholder versus physician preferences regarding amyloid PET testing.
Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2019 Jul-Sep;33(3):246-53. doi: 10.1097/wad.0000000000000311..
Keywords: Shared Decision Making, Dementia, Diagnostic Safety and Quality, Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Imaging, Neurological Disorders, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Provider, Provider: Physician
Djulbegovic B, Reljic T, Elqayam S
Structured decision-making drives guidelines panels' recommendations "for" but not "against" health interventions.
This study examined the determinants of guideline panels’ recommendations and whether there is a difference between how they make recommendations for or against health interventions. They examined the factors considered by members of 8 panels convened by the American Society of Hematology (ASH) to develop guidelines using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. They found that “for” decisions were made using certainty in evidence, balance of benefits and harms, and variability in patients’ values and preferences. However there was less strength of recommendation (SOR) certainty when making “against” recommendations.
AHRQ-funded; HS024917.
Citation: Djulbegovic B, Reljic T, Elqayam S .
Structured decision-making drives guidelines panels' recommendations "for" but not "against" health interventions.
J Clin Epidemiol 2019 Jun;110:23-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.02.009..
Keywords: Shared Decision Making, Guidelines, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Evidence-Based Practice
Armstrong MJ
Developing the disorders of consciousness guideline and challenges of integrating shared decision-making into clinical practice.
The purpose of this study was to review methodology informing evidence-based guideline development and integration of guidelines into clinical care through shared decision-making (SDM) and to highlight challenges to SDM in disorders of consciousness. Recently published disorders of consciousness guideline recommendations provide strategies for clinicians to enhance quality care for these individuals and also to provide details helping clinicians partner with individuals with disorders of consciousness and their surrogates. Further research is recommended into many aspects of caring for individuals with disorders of consciousness and optimal strategies for partnering with surrogates in decision-making.
AHRQ-funded; HS024159.
Citation: Armstrong MJ .
Developing the disorders of consciousness guideline and challenges of integrating shared decision-making into clinical practice.
J Head Trauma Rehabil 2019 May/Jun;34(3):199-204. doi: 10.1097/htr.0000000000000496.
.
.
Keywords: Shared Decision Making, Guidelines, Evidence-Based Practice, Neurological Disorders, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research