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
- Access to Care (1)
- Adverse Events (1)
- Asthma (1)
- Back Health and Pain (1)
- Behavioral Health (3)
- Cancer (4)
- Cancer: Colorectal Cancer (1)
- Cancer: Prostate Cancer (1)
- Cardiovascular Conditions (2)
- Care Management (1)
- Children/Adolescents (3)
- Chronic Conditions (1)
- Colonoscopy (1)
- Community Partnerships (1)
- Comparative Effectiveness (30)
- Data (10)
- Depression (2)
- Digestive Disease and Health (1)
- Disparities (1)
- Education: Continuing Medical Education (1)
- Education: Patient and Caregiver (1)
- Emergency Department (1)
- (-) Evidence-Based Practice (119)
- Guidelines (22)
- Healthcare-Associated Infections (HAIs) (1)
- Healthcare Delivery (5)
- Health Information Technology (HIT) (1)
- Health Services Research (HSR) (20)
- Implementation (6)
- Medicare (1)
- Medication (3)
- Mortality (1)
- Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) (1)
- Nursing (1)
- Outcomes (6)
- Pain (1)
- Patient-Centered Healthcare (4)
- Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (36)
- Patient and Family Engagement (3)
- Patient Safety (1)
- Policy (4)
- Prevention (8)
- Primary Care (4)
- Quality Indicators (QIs) (1)
- Quality Measures (3)
- Quality of Care (2)
- Racial and Ethnic Minorities (1)
- Registries (3)
- (-) Research Methodologies (119)
- Respiratory Conditions (1)
- Risk (1)
- Screening (1)
- Shared Decision Making (9)
- Skin Conditions (1)
- Social Determinants of Health (3)
- Training (2)
- Treatments (1)
- U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) (8)
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 119 Research Studies DisplayedHammack-Aviran C, Fair AM, Aldrich M
Integrating participants as partners in research governance and operations: an approach from the All of Us Research Program Engagement Core.
This paper examined the efforts to engage participants as partners in governance of large-scale research programs, in this case the NIH-sponsored All of Us Research Program, a precision medicine research initiative which intends to enroll at least one million participants. Over a 3-year period, the Consortium Members were surveyed to assess their readiness for participant engagement. During that period, all items on the survey increased, indicating higher readiness. Of the 291 respondents to the 2021 survey, there was almost unanimous agreement by respondents that participant perspectives are essential (100%), participants understand enough to contribute meaningfully (94%) and participants should be involved in setting goals (96%). There was less agreement that participants should have an equal voice in Working Groups (75%), Steering Committee (69%) and Executive Committee (63%).
AHRQ-funded; HS026122.
Citation: Hammack-Aviran C, Fair AM, Aldrich M .
Integrating participants as partners in research governance and operations: an approach from the All of Us Research Program Engagement Core.
BMJ Open 2023 Nov 27; 13(11):e068100. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068100..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice
Kahwati LC, Kelly BJ, Johnson M
End-user understanding of qualitative comparative analysis used within evidence synthesis: a mixed-methods study.
This study’s purpose was to identify effective approaches to communicating results from a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) within a systematic review. Interviews with 11 end-users followed by a randomized experiment with 254 participants provided QCA results for a hypothetical review presented through three formats (text, table, and figure). The authors observed a significant different in subjective comprehension across three presentation formats, with figure and text formats scoring higher compared to the table. Overall, there were no significant different for objective comprehension. However, interpretation (a unique component of QCA results) scores among participants that received the figure format were significantly higher than scores for participants who received the text or table. No significant differences were observed in objective comprehension for configuration interpretation.
AHRQ-funded; HS026258.
Citation: Kahwati LC, Kelly BJ, Johnson M .
End-user understanding of qualitative comparative analysis used within evidence synthesis: a mixed-methods study.
Res Synth Methods 2023 Mar;14(2):180-92. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1602.
Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Shmuel S, Leonard CE, Bykov K
Breaking research silos and stimulating "innovation at the edges" in epidemiology.
The authors discuss the importance of promoting an exchange of ideas across seemingly disparate epidemiologic subdisciplines. This exchange could lead to opportunities to learn from and to merge knowledge across subdisciplines, as well as promote "innovation at the edges." The authors also outline specific steps to promote such innovation at the researcher, institution, and professional society level.
AHRQ-funded; HS027623.
Citation: Shmuel S, Leonard CE, Bykov K .
Breaking research silos and stimulating "innovation at the edges" in epidemiology.
Am J Epidemiol 2023 Feb 24;192(3):323-27. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac192.
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Medication
Saldanha 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
Lin JS, Hoffman L, Bean SI
Addressing racism in preventive services: methods report to support the US Preventive Services Task Force.
The purpose of this report was to articulate the definitional and conceptual issues around racism and health inequity and to describe how racism and health inequities are currently addressed in preventive health. An audit was conducted assessing published literature on policy and position statements addressing racism, a subset of cancer and cardiovascular topics in USPSTF reports, recent systematic reviews on interventions to reduce health inequities, and societies, organizations, agencies, and funding bodies to gather information about how they address racism and health equity. Findings showed that racism is complex and pervasive, operates at multiple interrelated levels, and exerts negative effects on other social determinants and health and well-being through multiple pathways. The most directly relevant and immediately useful guidance identified is that from the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group.
AHRQ-funded; 290201600006C.
Citation: Lin JS, Hoffman L, Bean SI .
Addressing racism in preventive services: methods report to support the US Preventive Services Task Force.
JAMA 2021 Dec 21;326(23):2412-20. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.17579..
Keywords: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Social Determinants of Health, Racial and Ethnic Minorities, Disparities, Research Methodologies, Prevention, Evidence-Based Practice
Caughey AB, Krist AH, Wolff TA
AHRQ Author: Wolff TA
USPSTF approach to addressing sex and gender when making recommendations for clinical preventive services.
The USPSTF reviewed its past recommendations that included the use of sex and gender terms, reviewed the approaches of other guideline-making bodies, and pilot-tested strategies to address sex and gender diversity. Based on the findings, the USPSTF intends to use an inclusive approach to identify issues related to sex and gender at the start of the guideline development process; assess the applicability, variability, and quality of evidence as a function of sex and gender; ensure clarity in the use of language regarding sex and gender; and identify evidence gaps related to sex and gender. The USPSTF recognizes limited evidence to inform the preventive care of populations based on gender identity.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Caughey AB, Krist AH, Wolff TA .
USPSTF approach to addressing sex and gender when making recommendations for clinical preventive services.
JAMA 2021 Nov 16;326(19):1953-61. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.15731..
Keywords: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Guidelines, Evidence-Based Practice, Prevention, Research Methodologies
Yao L, Ahmed MM, Guyatt GH
Discordant and inappropriate discordant recommendations in consensus and evidence based guidelines: empirical analysis.
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether alignment of strength of recommendations with quality of evidence differs in consensus based versus evidence based guidelines. The investigators concluded that consensus based guidelines produced more recommendations violating the evidence based medicine principles than evidence based guidelines. They suggested that ensuring appropriate alignment of quality of evidence with the strength of recommendations is key to the development of "trustworthy" guidelines.
AHRQ-funded; HS024917.
Citation: Yao L, Ahmed MM, Guyatt GH .
Discordant and inappropriate discordant recommendations in consensus and evidence based guidelines: empirical analysis.
BMJ 2021 Nov 25;375:e066045. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-066045..
Keywords: Guidelines, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Lewis CC, Powell BJ, Brewer SK
Advancing mechanisms of implementation to accelerate sustainable evidence-based practice integration: protocol for generating a research agenda.
This article outlines the protocol for an AHRQ-funded initiative to: 1) establish priorities for an agenda to guide research on implementation mechanisms in health and public health, and 2) disseminate the agenda to research, policy, and practice audiences. The goal is to advance mechanisms of implementation to accelerate sustainable evidence-based practice integration. A network of scientific experts will be created to convene in “Deep Dive” meetings for 3 years. The research agenda will be generated through analysis and synthesis of information from 6 sources: (1) systematic reviews, (2) network members' approaches to studying mechanisms, (3) new proposals presented in implementation proposal feedback sessions, (4) working group sessions conducted in a leading implementation research training institute, (5) breakout sessions at the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration's (SIRC) 2019 conference and (6) SIRC conference abstracts. Mechanism-relevant text segments will be extracted by two members and a third member will generate statements as an input for concept mapping.
AHRQ-funded; HS025632.
Citation: Lewis CC, Powell BJ, Brewer SK .
Advancing mechanisms of implementation to accelerate sustainable evidence-based practice integration: protocol for generating a research agenda.
BMJ Open 2021 Oct 18;11(10):e053474. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053474..
Keywords: Implementation, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Health Services Research (HSR)
Davidson KW, Krist AH, Tseng CW
AHRQ Author: Mills J, Borsky A
Incorporation of social risk in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations and identification of key challenges for primary care.
The authors assessed how social risks have been considered in USPSTF recommendation statements and identified current gaps in evidence needed to expand the systematic inclusion of social risks in future recommendations. They concluded that their report serves as a benchmark and foundation for ongoing work to advance the goal of ensuring that health equity and social risks are incorporated into USPSTF methods and recommendations.
AHRQ-authored.
Citation: Davidson KW, Krist AH, Tseng CW .
Incorporation of social risk in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations and identification of key challenges for primary care.
JAMA 2021 Oct 12;326(14):1410-15. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.12833..
Keywords: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Primary Care, Social Determinants of Health, Risk, Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies, Guidelines
Djulbegovic B, Hozo I, Li SA
Certainty of evidence and intervention's benefits and harms are key determinants of guidelines' recommendations.
This study’s goal was to identify the key determinants of clinical guideline development. This study used a web-based survey of 12 panels of 153 “voting” members who issued 2941 recommendations and a qualitative analysis of 13 panels of 311 attendees. When intervention’s benefits outweigh harms compared with no recommendations: the probability of issuing strong recommendations in favor of intervention was 0.22 when certainty of evidence (CoE) was very low; 0.5 when low; 0.74 when moderate, and 0.85 when high. No other factor significantly affected recommendations. Panelists spent over 50% of their time debating CoE with the chairs and co-chairs dominating discussion.
AHRQ-funded; HS024917.
Citation: Djulbegovic B, Hozo I, Li SA .
Certainty of evidence and intervention's benefits and harms are key determinants of guidelines' recommendations.
J Clin Epidemiol 2021 Aug;136:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.025..
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Guidelines, Research Methodologies, Shared Decision Making
Murad MH, Fiordalisi C, Pillay J
AHRQ Author: Chang S
Making narrative statements to describe treatment effects.
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center Program developed guidance for narrative summaries of treatment effects that identifies five constructs. In this paper the investigators explicitly identified these constructs to facilitate developing narrative statements: (1) direction of effect, (2) size of effect, (3) clinical importance, (4) statistical significance, and (5) strength or certainty of evidence.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290201500013I; 290201700003C; 290201500001I; 290201500008I; 290201500007I; 290201500011I; 290201500010I; 290201500012I; 290201500009I; 290201500002; HS025840.
Citation: Murad MH, Fiordalisi C, Pillay J .
Making narrative statements to describe treatment effects.
J Gen Intern Med 2021 Jan;36(1):196-99. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-06330-y..
Keywords: Evidence-Based Practice, Research Methodologies
Reid E, JM JM, Fiordalisi C
AHRQ Author: Chang S
NxGen evidence: redesigning the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Effective Health Care website to promote engagement, interactivity and usability of systematic reviews.
This Brief Methods Note critiques the current paper-based format for systematic reviews and describes the development of a next generation (NxGen) AHRQ EPC Effective Health Care website. The authors suggest that this redesigned platform will allow end-users of all types to find and share the evidence they need through data visualizations and other interactive displays. Several design principles guided the development of NxGen to make systematic review findings more accessible, customizable, adaptable, interactive, and shareable.
AHRQ-authored; AHRQ-funded; 290201700003C.
Citation: Reid E, JM JM, Fiordalisi C .
NxGen evidence: redesigning the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Effective Health Care website to promote engagement, interactivity and usability of systematic reviews.
Res Synth Methods 2021 Jan;12(1):118-23. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1438..
Keywords: Research Methodologies, Evidence-Based Practice, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Comparative Effectiveness
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