College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210,USA.
J Eval Clin Pract. 2009 Dec;15(6):976-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01322.x.
Rationale Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is the study of two or more approaches to a health problem to determine which one results in better health outcomes. It is viewed by some in the USA as a promising strategy for health care reform. Aims and Objectives In this paper, nascent US CER policy will be described and analysed in order to determine its similarities and differences with EBM and its chances of success. Methods Document review and process tracing Results CER shares the logic of policies promoting evidence-based medicine, but invites greater methodological flexibility to ensure external validity across a range of health care topics. Conclusions This may narrow the inferential distance from knowledge to action, but efforts to change the US health care system through CER will face familiar epistemological quandaries and 'patient-centred' politics on the left and right.
背景
比较效果研究(CER)是对解决健康问题的两种或更多方法进行研究,以确定哪种方法能产生更好的健康结果。在美国,有些人认为这是医疗改革的一项有前途的策略。
目的和目标
本文将描述和分析美国新兴的 CER 政策,以确定其与循证医学的异同及其成功的可能性。
方法
文件审查和过程跟踪
结果
CER 与促进循证医学的政策具有相同的逻辑,但为了确保在一系列医疗保健主题中具有外部有效性,它允许更大的方法灵活性。
结论
这可能会缩小从知识到行动的推断距离,但通过 CER 改变美国医疗保健系统的努力将面临熟悉的认识论困境和左右两边的“以患者为中心”的政治。