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 11 of 11 Research Studies DisplayedReid 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
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