• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparative effectiveness research priorities at federal agencies: the view from the Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institute on Aging, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.联邦机构的比较疗效研究重点:来自退伍军人事务部、国家老龄化研究所和医疗保健研究与质量局的观点。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Jun;58(6):1187-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02939.x.
2
Comparative effectiveness research (CER): a summary of AHRQ's CER on therapies for rheumatoid arthritis.比较效果研究(CER):美国医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)关于类风湿关节炎治疗方法的比较效果研究综述
J Manag Care Pharm. 2011 Nov-Dec;17(9 Suppl B):S19-24. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2011.17.s9-b.S19.
3
The impact of comparative effectiveness research on interventional pain management: evolution from Medicare Modernization Act to Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.比较疗效研究对介入性疼痛管理的影响:从医疗保险现代化法案到患者保护与平价医疗法案以及患者为中心的医疗成果研究所的演变。
Pain Physician. 2011 May-Jun;14(3):E249-82.
4
Department of Veterans Affairs Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Centers: translating aging research into clinical geriatrics.退伍军人事务部老年病学研究、教育和临床中心:将衰老研究转化为临床老年医学。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 Jul;60(7):1347-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04004.x. Epub 2012 Jun 15.
5
The ARRA investment in CER: a description of the midstream evaluation and how the funds were allocated and CER priorities addressed.美国复苏与再投资法案对比较效果研究的投资:对中期评估的描述以及资金的分配方式和比较效果研究优先事项的处理情况。
J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Nov;3(6):581-9. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.55.
6
INviting Veterans InTo Enrollment in Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers (INVITE-ADRC): An NIA and VA-sponsored initiative to increase veteran participation in aging and dementia research.邀请退伍军人参与阿尔茨海默病研究中心(INVITE-ADRC):一项由美国国立卫生研究院和美国退伍军人事务部共同发起的倡议,旨在增加退伍军人参与老龄化和痴呆症研究。
Alzheimers Dement. 2024 Apr;20(4):3088-3098. doi: 10.1002/alz.13725. Epub 2024 Feb 13.
7
Comparative effectiveness research: a progress report.比较疗效研究:进展报告。
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Oct 5;153(7):469-72. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-153-7-201010050-00269. Epub 2010 Aug 2.
8
Assessing the long-term impact of public investments in comparative effectiveness research: conceptual framework and lessons learned.评估公共投资于比较效果研究的长期影响:概念框架与经验教训。
J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Nov;3(6):657-66. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.60.
9
Leveraging the health information technology infrastructure to advance federal research priorities.利用健康信息技术基础设施推进联邦研究重点。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Apr 1;27(4):647-651. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa011.
10
The politics of comparative effectiveness research: lessons from recent history.比较效果研究的政治学:近代历史的教训
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2014 Feb;39(1):139-70. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2395199. Epub 2013 Nov 5.

引用本文的文献

1
Validation of LittleEARS questionnaire in Hindi language.用印地语对LittleEARS问卷进行验证。
J Otol. 2023 Apr;18(2):71-78. doi: 10.1016/j.joto.2022.12.003. Epub 2022 Dec 28.
2
Decompression Using Minimally Invasive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Associated with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Review.微创减压手术治疗退变性腰椎滑脱症合并腰椎管狭窄症的综述
Pain Ther. 2021 Dec;10(2):941-959. doi: 10.1007/s40122-021-00293-6. Epub 2021 Jul 28.
3
Comparing three approaches for involving patients in research prioritization: a qualitative study of participant experiences.比较让患者参与研究优先级确定的三种方法:对参与者体验的定性研究
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 May 1;6:18. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00196-4. eCollection 2020.
4
Timing of Birth as an Emergent Risk Factor for Rotavirus Hospitalization and Vaccine Performance in the Postvaccination Era in the United States.出生时间成为美国疫苗接种后时代轮状病毒住院和疫苗效果的新兴风险因素
Am J Epidemiol. 2018 Aug 1;187(8):1745-1751. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwy054.
5
Meta-analysis of Cochlear Implantation Outcomes Evaluated With General Health-related Patient-reported Outcome Measures.采用一般健康相关患者报告结局指标评估人工耳蜗植入效果的Meta分析。
Otol Neurotol. 2018 Jan;39(1):29-36. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001620.
6
Study of Methods for Assessing Research Topic Elicitation and pRioritization (SMARTER): Study Protocol to Compare Qualitative Research Methods and Advance Patient Engagement in Research.评估研究主题引出与优先级确定方法的研究(SMARTER):比较定性研究方法并促进患者参与研究的研究方案
JMIR Res Protoc. 2017 Sep 7;6(9):e168. doi: 10.2196/resprot.7565.
7
Meta-analysis of quality-of-life improvement after cochlear implantation and associations with speech recognition abilities.人工耳蜗植入后生活质量改善及其与言语识别能力相关性的Meta分析。
Laryngoscope. 2018 Apr;128(4):982-990. doi: 10.1002/lary.26738. Epub 2017 Jul 21.
8
Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review.微创后路腰椎融合术的比较结果:系统评价。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 Jun;472(6):1727-37. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3465-5.
9
Underrepresentation of elderly people in randomised controlled trials. The example of trials of 4 widely prescribed drugs.随机对照试验中老年人代表性不足。4 种广泛应用药物试验的例证。
PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33559. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033559. Epub 2012 Mar 30.
10
Immune aging and challenges for immune protection of the graying population.免疫衰老与老年人群免疫保护面临的挑战。
Aging Dis. 2011 Oct;2(5):339-45. Epub 2011 Oct 28.

本文引用的文献

1
On-pump versus off-pump coronary-artery bypass surgery.体外循环下与非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术
N Engl J Med. 2009 Nov 5;361(19):1827-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0902905.
2
Glucose control and vascular complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes.2型糖尿病退伍军人的血糖控制与血管并发症
N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 8;360(2):129-39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0808431. Epub 2008 Dec 17.
3
Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease.稳定型冠心病接受或不接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的优化药物治疗
N Engl J Med. 2007 Apr 12;356(15):1503-16. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070829. Epub 2007 Mar 26.
4
Major outcomes in moderately hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive patients randomized to pravastatin vs usual care: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT).中度高胆固醇血症高血压患者随机接受普伐他汀与常规治疗的主要结局:预防心脏病发作的抗高血压和降脂治疗试验(ALLHAT-LLT)
JAMA. 2002 Dec 18;288(23):2998-3007. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.23.2998.
5
Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).高危高血压患者随机接受血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂或钙通道阻滞剂与利尿剂治疗的主要结局:抗高血压和降脂治疗预防心脏病发作试验(ALLHAT)
JAMA. 2002 Dec 18;288(23):2981-97. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.23.2981.
6
Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin.通过生活方式干预或二甲双胍降低2型糖尿病的发病率。
N Engl J Med. 2002 Feb 7;346(6):393-403. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa012512.

联邦机构的比较疗效研究重点:来自退伍军人事务部、国家老龄化研究所和医疗保健研究与质量局的观点。

Comparative effectiveness research priorities at federal agencies: the view from the Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institute on Aging, and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

机构信息

Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.

出版信息

J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Jun;58(6):1187-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02939.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02939.x
PMID:20936736
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2953735/
Abstract

In the last year, attention has been focused on translating federally sponsored health research into better health for Americans. Since the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) on February 17, 2009, ARRA funds to support Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) have increased this focus. A large proportion of topical areas of interest in CER affects the older segment of the population. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) have supported robust research portfolios focused on aging populations that meet the varying definitions of CER. This short article briefly describes the research missions of the AHRQ, NIA, and VA. The various definitions of CER as the Congressional Budget Office, the Institute of Medicine, and the ARRA-established Federal Coordinating Council have put forward, as well as important topics for which CER is particularly needed, are then reviewed. Finally, approaches in which the three agencies support CER involving the aging population are set forth and opportunities for future CER research outlined.

摘要

在过去的一年中,人们一直关注将联邦资助的健康研究转化为美国人更好的健康。自 2009 年 2 月 17 日美国复苏与再投资法案(ARRA)通过以来,支持比较效果研究(CER)的 ARRA 资金增加了这一重点。CER 中大量受到关注的专题领域都影响到人口中的老年群体。美国退伍军人事务部(VA)、国家老龄化研究所(NIA)和医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)支持了针对老年人口的强大研究组合,这些研究符合 CER 的不同定义。这篇短文简要描述了 AHRQ、NIA 和 VA 的研究任务。然后,回顾了国会预算办公室、医学研究所和 ARRA 设立的联邦协调理事会提出的 CER 的各种定义,以及特别需要 CER 的重要主题。最后,阐述了这三个机构支持涉及老年人口的 CER 的方法,并概述了未来 CER 研究的机会。