TY - JOUR
T1 - AHRQ Series Paper 2
T2 - Principles for developing guidance: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program
AU - Helfand, Mark
AU - Balshem, Howard
PY - 2010/5
Y1 - 2010/5
N2 - Objective: This article describes some of the fundamental principles that have been developed to guide the work of producing comparative effectiveness reviews (CERs). Study Design and Setting: We briefly describe the role stakeholders play in providing important insights that inform the evidence-gathering process, and discuss the critical role of analytic frameworks in illuminating the relationship between surrogate measures and health outcomes, providing an understanding of the context in which clinical decisions are made and the uncertainties that underlie clinical controversies. Results: We describe the Effective Health Care program conceptual model for considering different types of evidence that emphasizes minimizing the risk of bias, but places high-quality, highly applicable evidence about effectiveness at the top of the hierarchy. Finally, we briefly describe areas of future methodological research. Conclusion: CERs have become a foundation for decision-making in clinical practice and health policy. To be useful, CERs must approach the evidence from a patient-centered perspective; explore the clinical logic underlying the rationale for a service; cast a broad net with respect to types of evidence, placing a high value on effectiveness and applicability, in addition to internal validity; and, present benefits and harms for treatments and tests in a consistent way.
AB - Objective: This article describes some of the fundamental principles that have been developed to guide the work of producing comparative effectiveness reviews (CERs). Study Design and Setting: We briefly describe the role stakeholders play in providing important insights that inform the evidence-gathering process, and discuss the critical role of analytic frameworks in illuminating the relationship between surrogate measures and health outcomes, providing an understanding of the context in which clinical decisions are made and the uncertainties that underlie clinical controversies. Results: We describe the Effective Health Care program conceptual model for considering different types of evidence that emphasizes minimizing the risk of bias, but places high-quality, highly applicable evidence about effectiveness at the top of the hierarchy. Finally, we briefly describe areas of future methodological research. Conclusion: CERs have become a foundation for decision-making in clinical practice and health policy. To be useful, CERs must approach the evidence from a patient-centered perspective; explore the clinical logic underlying the rationale for a service; cast a broad net with respect to types of evidence, placing a high value on effectiveness and applicability, in addition to internal validity; and, present benefits and harms for treatments and tests in a consistent way.
KW - Avoiding bias
KW - Comparative effectiveness reviews
KW - Evidence-based medicine
KW - Hierarchy of evidence
KW - Patient-centered care
KW - Stakeholders
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949596386&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77949596386&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.05.005
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.05.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 19716268
AN - SCOPUS:77949596386
SN - 0895-4356
VL - 63
SP - 484
EP - 490
JO - Journal of Chronic Diseases
JF - Journal of Chronic Diseases
IS - 5
ER -