Patients and Clinicians as Stakeholders in Comparative Effectiveness Research: Multiple Perspectives and Evolving Roles
Download
Key Findings
Key Findings:
- Clinicians understood and appreciated the potential value of CER, but their concern about the potential for negative unintended consequences is a potential barrier to the use of CER evidence in practice.
- Patients had generally positive attitudes toward CER, but their poor understanding of it and their tendency to defer to clinicians are potential barriers to engagement in evidence-based decision making.
- Clinician and/or patient engagement in CER requires time to plan and implement, compensation for stakeholders, training for investigators and stakeholders, and other supports throughout.
- Clinician and/or patient engagement in CER requires development and maintenance of relationships between investigators and stakeholders that would be facilitated by the development of stakeholder groups or lists of interested and prepared stakeholders.
To improve health outcomes, clinicians and patients must have evidence-based information available to help them make informed decisions, the knowledge and skills to use this information, and positive attitudes about the value of using comparative effectiveness research (CER) in decision making. As a part of the midstream evaluation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act CER portfolio, we collected information from a variety of sources regarding perspectives on CER and engagement of clinicians and patients in CER.
More like this from Mathematica
How do you apply evidence?
Take our quick four-question survey to help us curate evidence and insights that serve you.
Take our survey