Comparative Effectiveness Research Policy Brief (July 2010)

CMTP held a series of Policy Leadership Briefings in order to provide a neutral forum for key policy decision-makers and experts to engage in a frank and informative dialogue on critical CER issues, concerns and policy options. The first of these sessions focused on various aspects of CER, addressing questions on the differences between CER and traditional clinical research, methods by which CER studies should be carried out across the clinical research enterprise, as well as the critical factors necessary for the PCOR Institute to provide maximum value.

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) is, by definition, intended to provide evidence that informs real world decision making by physicians and patients in choosing between treatment options. The underlying premise of CER as defined in the health reform law is that such evidence is too often lacking. CER attempts to rectify that by conducting studies that differ in critical ways from many traditional clinical studies. What those differences are, how they will be carried out, and the role of the Patient Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) Institute in defining and implementing these approaches will be addressed by some of the nation’s leading authorities and decision makers in CER.