Literature DB >> 21819169

Using medicare data for comparative effectiveness research: opportunities and challenges.

Vicki Fung1, Richard J Brand, Joseph P Newhouse, John Hsu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With the introduction of Part D drug benefits, Medicare began to collect information on diagnoses, treatments, and clinical events for millions of beneficiaries. These data are a promising resource for comparative effectiveness research (CER) on treatments, benefit designs, and delivery systems.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the data available for researchers and approaches that could be used to enhance the value of Medicare data for CER. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES: Using currently available Medicare data for CER is challenging; as with all administrative data, it is not possible to capture every factor that contributes to prescribing decisions and patients are not randomly assigned to treatments. In addition, Part D plan selection and switching may influence treatment decisions and contribute to selection bias. Exploiting certain program aspects could address these limitations. For example, ongoing changes in Medicare or plan policies and the random assignment of beneficiaries with Part D low-income subsidies into plans with different formularies could yield natural experiments. POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Refining policies for time to data release, provision of additional data elements, and linkage with more beneficiary level information would improve the value and usability of these data. Improving the transparency and reproducibility of findings, and potential open access for qualified stakeholders are also important policy considerations. Data needs must be reconciled with current policies and goals.
CONCLUSIONS: Medicare data provide a rich resource for CER. Leveraging existing program elements, combined with some administrative changes in data availability, could create large data sets for evaluating treatment patterns, spending, and coverage decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21819169      PMCID: PMC3705556     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Manag Care        ISSN: 1088-0224            Impact factor:   2.229


  24 in total

1.  Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy.

Authors:  Sean R Tunis; Daniel B Stryer; Carolyn M Clancy
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-09-24       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report--Part II.

Authors:  Emily Cox; Bradley C Martin; Tjeerd Van Staa; Edeltraut Garbe; Uwe Siebert; Michael L Johnson
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2009-09-10       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Selection of patients for randomized controlled trials: implications of wide or narrow eligibility criteria.

Authors:  S Yusuf; P Held; K K Teo; E R Toretsky
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1990 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Hospital use and mortality among Medicare beneficiaries in Boston and New Haven.

Authors:  J E Wennberg; J L Freeman; R M Shelton; T A Bubolz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-10-26       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Representation of elderly persons and women in published randomized trials of acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  P Y Lee; K P Alexander; B G Hammill; S K Pasquali; E D Peterson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-08-08       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  The implications of regional variations in Medicare spending. Part 1: the content, quality, and accessibility of care.

Authors:  Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; Thérèse A Stukel; Daniel J Gottlieb; F L Lucas; Etoile L Pinder
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2003-02-18       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Effects of Medicaid drug-payment limits on admission to hospitals and nursing homes.

Authors:  S B Soumerai; D Ross-Degnan; J Avorn; T j McLaughlin; I Choodnovskiy
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1991-10-10       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  The exclusion of the elderly and women from clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J H Gurwitz; N F Col; J Avorn
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-09-16       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Developing improved observational methods for evaluating therapeutic effectiveness.

Authors:  R I Horwitz; C M Viscoli; J D Clemens; R T Sadock
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 4.965

10.  Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly reduce mortality? Analysis using instrumental variables.

Authors:  M McClellan; B J McNeil; J P Newhouse
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-09-21       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Are Publicly Funded Health Databases Geographically Detailed and Timely Enough to Support Patient-Centered Outcomes Research?

Authors:  Soojin Min; Laurie T Martin; Carolyn M Rutter; Thomas W Concannon
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Barriers to Achieving Economies of Scale in Analysis of EHR Data. A Cautionary Tale.

Authors:  Mark P Sendak; Suresh Balu; Kevin A Schulman
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 2.342

3.  Novel Data Linkages to Characterize Palliative and End-Of-Life Care: Challenges and Considerations.

Authors:  Cara L McDermott; Ruth A Engelberg; Cossette Woo; Li Li; Catherine Fedorenko; Scott D Ramsey; J Randall Curtis
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 3.612

4.  A framework for understanding cancer comparative effectiveness research data needs.

Authors:  William R Carpenter; Anne-Marie Meyer; Amy P Abernethy; Til Stürmer; Michael R Kosorok
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Cost-effectiveness model for hepatitis C screening and treatment: Implications for Egypt and other countries with high prevalence.

Authors:  David D Kim; David W Hutton; Ahmed A Raouf; Mohsen Salama; Ahmed Hablas; Ibrahim A Seifeldin; Amr S Soliman
Journal:  Glob Public Health       Date:  2014-12-03

6.  Comparative risk of hip fractures in elderly nursing home patients with depression using paroxetine and other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

Authors:  Vishal Bali; Satabdi Chatterjee; Michael L Johnson; Hua Chen; Ryan M Carnahan; Rajender R Aparasu
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 1.744

7.  An official American Thoracic Society research statement: comparative effectiveness research in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.

Authors:  Shannon S Carson; Christopher H Goss; Sanjay R Patel; Antonio Anzueto; David H Au; Stuart Elborn; Joe K Gerald; Lynn B Gerald; Jeremy M Kahn; Atul Malhotra; Richard A Mularski; Kristin A Riekert; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Terri E Weaver; Jerry A Krishnan
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-11-15       Impact factor: 21.405

8.  Association of Acute Endophthalmitis With Intravitreal Injections of Corticosteroids or Anti-Vascular Growth Factor Agents in a Nationwide Study in France.

Authors:  Florian Baudin; Eric Benzenine; Anne-Sophie Mariet; Alain M Bron; Vincent Daien; Jean François Korobelnik; Catherine Quantin; Catherine Creuzot-Garcher
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 7.389

9.  Data, Data Everywhere, but Access Remains a Big Issue for Researchers: A Review of Access Policies for Publicly-Funded Patient-Level Health Care Data in the United States.

Authors:  Jalpa A Doshi; Franklin B Hendrick; Jennifer S Graff; Bruce C Stuart
Journal:  EGEMS (Wash DC)       Date:  2016-03-31

10.  Evaluating treatment effectiveness under model misspecification: A comparison of targeted maximum likelihood estimation with bias-corrected matching.

Authors:  Noémi Kreif; Susan Gruber; Rosalba Radice; Richard Grieve; Jasjeet S Sekhon
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 3.021

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.