Literature DB >> 26388438

Stakeholder assessment of comparative effectiveness research needs for Medicaid populations.

Michael A Fischer1, Cora Allen-Coleman1, Stephen F Farrell1, Sebastian Schneeweiss1.   

Abstract

Patients, providers and policy-makers rely heavily on comparative effectiveness research (CER) when making complex, real-world medical decisions. In particular, Medicaid providers and policy-makers face unique challenges in decision-making because their program cares for traditionally underserved populations, especially children, pregnant women and people with mental illness. Because these patient populations have generally been underrepresented in research discussions, CER questions for these groups may be understudied. To address this problem, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality commissioned our team to work with Medicaid Medical Directors and other stakeholders to identify relevant CER questions. Through an iterative process of topic identification and refinement, we developed relevant, feasible and actionable questions based on issues affecting Medicaid programs nationwide. We describe challenges and limitations and provide recommendations for future stakeholder engagement.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CER; Medicaid; comparative effectiveness research; stakeholder; underserved populations

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26388438      PMCID: PMC5549719          DOI: 10.2217/cer.15.26

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Eff Res        ISSN: 2042-6305            Impact factor:   1.744


  6 in total

1.  A new taxonomy for stakeholder engagement in patient-centered outcomes research.

Authors:  Thomas W Concannon; Paul Meissner; Jo Anne Grunbaum; Newell McElwee; Jeanne-Marie Guise; John Santa; Patrick H Conway; Denise Daudelin; Elaine H Morrato; Laurel K Leslie
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in developing a translation table framework for comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Richard E Gliklich; Michelle B Leavy; Priscilla Velentgas; Nancy A Dreyer; Sean R Tunis; Penny Mohr; Donna A Messner; Rachael M Moloney; Swapna U Karkare; Robert W Dubois; Jennifer S Graff
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.744

3.  Stakeholder engagement for comparative effectiveness research in cancer care: experience of the DEcIDE Cancer Consortium.

Authors:  Caprice C Greenberg; Jennifer K Wind; George J Chang; Ronald C Chen; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.744

4.  Comparative effectiveness research priorities: identifying critical gaps in evidence for clinical and health policy decision making.

Authors:  Kalipso Chalkidou; Danielle Whicher; Weslie Kary; Sean Tunis
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.188

5.  What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians.

Authors:  John J Riva; Keshena M P Malik; Stephen J Burnie; Andrea R Endicott; Jason W Busse
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2012-09

6.  Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement.

Authors:  Patricia A Deverka; Danielle C Lavallee; Priyanka J Desai; Laura C Esmail; Scott D Ramsey; David L Veenstra; Sean R Tunis
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.744

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.