• 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

亚洲、欧洲和北美的比较效果研究调查。

Investigation of comparative effectiveness research in Asia, Europe, and North America.

作者信息

Patel Isha, Rarus Rachel, Tan Xi, Lee E K, Guy Jason, Ahmad Akram, Chang Jongwha

机构信息

Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, Shenandoah University, Winchester, VA, USA.

The University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA.

出版信息

Indian J Pharmacol. 2015 Nov-Dec;47(6):585-93. doi: 10.4103/0253-7613.169592.

DOI:10.4103/0253-7613.169592
PMID:26729947
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4689009/
Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is an important branch of pharmacoeconomics that systematically studies and evaluates the cost-effectiveness of medical interventions. CER plays instrumental roles in guiding government public health policy programs and insurance. Countries throughout the world use different methods of CER to help make medical decisions based on providing optimal therapy at a reduced cost. Expenses to the healthcare system continue to rise, and CER is one-way in which expenses could be curbed in the future by applying cost-effectiveness evidence to clinical decisions. China, India, South Korea, and the United Kingdom are of essential focus because these country's economies and health care expenses continue to expand. The structures and use of CER are diverse throughout these countries, and each is of prime importance. By conducting this thorough comparison of CER in different nations, strategies and organizational setups from different countries can be applied to help guide public health and medical decision-making in order to continue to expand the establishment and role of CER programs. The patient-centered medical home has been created to help reduce costs in the primary care sector and to help improve the effectiveness of therapy. Barriers to CER are also important as many stakeholders need to be able to work together to provide the best CER evidence. The advancement of CER in multiple countries throughout the world provides a possible way of reducing costs to the healthcare system in an age of expanding expenses.

摘要

比较效果研究(CER)是药物经济学的一个重要分支,它系统地研究和评估医疗干预措施的成本效益。CER在指导政府公共卫生政策项目和保险方面发挥着重要作用。世界各国使用不同的CER方法,以在降低成本的基础上提供最佳治疗方案,从而帮助做出医疗决策。医疗保健系统的费用持续上涨,而CER是未来通过将成本效益证据应用于临床决策来控制费用的一种方式。中国、印度、韩国和英国是重点关注对象,因为这些国家的经济和医疗保健费用持续增长。这些国家的CER结构和应用各不相同,且每个都至关重要。通过对不同国家的CER进行全面比较,可以应用不同国家的策略和组织架构,以帮助指导公共卫生和医疗决策,从而不断扩大CER项目的建立和作用。以患者为中心的医疗之家已被创建,以帮助降低初级保健部门的成本,并提高治疗效果。CER的障碍也很重要,因为许多利益相关者需要共同努力,以提供最佳的CER证据。在费用不断上涨的时代,全球多个国家CER的进展为降低医疗保健系统成本提供了一种可能的途径。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/33c8/4689009/ae95ca4cdffa/IJPharm-47-585-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/33c8/4689009/ae95ca4cdffa/IJPharm-47-585-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/33c8/4689009/ae95ca4cdffa/IJPharm-47-585-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Investigation of comparative effectiveness research in Asia, Europe, and North America.亚洲、欧洲和北美的比较效果研究调查。
Indian J Pharmacol. 2015 Nov-Dec;47(6):585-93. doi: 10.4103/0253-7613.169592.
2
The ISPOR Good Practices for Quality Improvement of Cost-Effectiveness Research Task Force Report.ISPOR 成本效益研究质量改进良好实践工作组报告。
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12(8):1086-99. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00605.x. Epub 2009 Sep 10.
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
Facts, fallacies, and politics of comparative effectiveness research: Part I. Basic considerations.比较疗效研究的事实、谬论和政治:第一部分。基本考虑。
Pain Physician. 2010 Jan-Feb;13(1):E23-54.
5
The (possible) impact of comparative effectiveness research on pharmaceutical industry decision making.比较疗效研究对制药行业决策的(可能)影响。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Mar;87(3):264-6. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2009.243.
6
Facts, fallacies, and politics of comparative effectiveness research: Part 2 - implications for interventional pain management.比较疗效研究的事实、谬论和政治:第 2 部分-对介入性疼痛管理的影响。
Pain Physician. 2010 Jan-Feb;13(1):E55-79.
7
A tall order on a tight timeframe: stakeholder perspectives on comparative effectiveness research using electronic clinical data.在紧迫的时间内完成艰巨的任务:利益相关者对使用电子临床数据进行的比较有效性研究的看法。
J Comp Eff Res. 2012 Sep;1(5):441-51. doi: 10.2217/cer.12.47.
8
Translating comparative effectiveness research into Medicaid payment policy: views from medical and pharmacy directors.将比较效果研究转化为医疗补助支付政策:医学及药学主任的观点
J Comp Eff Res. 2015 Mar;4(2):79-88. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.68.
9
Can CER be an effective tool for change in the development and assessment of new drugs and technologies?成本效果分析(CER)能否成为新药和新技术研发及评估中推动变革的有效工具?
J Manag Care Pharm. 2012 Jun;18(5 Supp A):S06-11. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2012.18.s5-a.S06.
10
Comparative effectiveness research: Policy context, methods development and research infrastructure.比较疗效研究:政策背景、方法发展与研究基础设施。
Stat Med. 2010 Aug 30;29(19):1963-76. doi: 10.1002/sim.3818.

引用本文的文献

1
Naoxuekang, Xinnaoshutong and Xuesaitong capsules for treating stroke: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.脑心康、心脑舒通和血塞通胶囊治疗脑卒中的随机对照试验方案。
BMJ Open. 2017 Nov 8;7(11):e015983. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015983.

本文引用的文献

1
Who pays for health care in China? The case of Heilongjiang province.在中国谁为医疗保健买单?以黑龙江省为例。
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 1;9(10):e108867. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108867. eCollection 2014.
2
Five reasons that many comparative effectiveness studies fail to change patient care and clinical practice.导致许多比较效果研究未能改变患者护理和临床实践的五个原因。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Oct;31(10):2168-75. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.0150.
3
Is treatment heterogeneity an Achilles' heel for comparative effectiveness research?
治疗异质性是比较效果研究的致命弱点吗?
Pharmacotherapy. 2012 Jul;32(7):583-5. doi: 10.1002/phar.1131.
4
Reducing long-term cost by transforming primary care: evidence from Geisinger's medical home model.通过医疗之家模式转变初级保健以降低长期成本:来自 Geisinger 的证据。
Am J Manag Care. 2012 Mar;18(3):149-55.
5
Evaluation on the first 2 years of the positive list system in South Korea.韩国“肯定列表制度”实施 2 年评价
Health Policy. 2012 Jan;104(1):32-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.09.006. Epub 2011 Oct 15.
6
Growing application of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research in health-care decision-making in the Asia-Pacific region.药物经济学与结果研究在亚太地区医疗保健决策中的应用日益广泛。
Value Health. 2009 Nov-Dec;12 Suppl 3:S1-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00618.x.
7
How effectively can the New Cooperative Medical Scheme reduce catastrophic health expenditure for the poor and non-poor in rural China?新型农村合作医疗制度在中国农村能在多大程度上有效减少贫困和非贫困人口的灾难性卫生支出?
Trop Med Int Health. 2010 Apr;15(4):468-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3156.2010.02469.x. Epub 2010 Feb 17.
8
Five next steps for a new national program for comparative-effectiveness research.新的国家比较效果研究计划的五个后续步骤。
N Engl J Med. 2010 Mar 18;362(11):970-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1000096. Epub 2010 Feb 17.
9
Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada.利用有效性和成本效益来做出药物覆盖范围决策:英国、澳大利亚和加拿大的比较
JAMA. 2009 Oct 7;302(13):1437-43. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1409.
10
Borrowing and selling to pay for health care in low- and middle-income countries.在中低收入国家,借款和出售资产以支付医疗费用。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 Jul-Aug;28(4):1056-66. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.28.4.1056.