In this week's edition...
— Statement from PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho on the Proposed Section 504 Rule. See details below.
— Letter from Over 1400 Researchers, Organizations and Individuals Opposing NIMHD Exclusion of People with Disabilities. See details below.
— PIPC Statement on Selection of Drugs Under Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program Guidance. Click here to read the statement.
— PIPC Offers Comments on Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies. Click here to read the letter.
— National Forum for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Annual Meeting October 26. Click here to register to attend in person or virtually.
— Emerging Threats in States for Use of Discriminatory Metrics. See details below.
— What Happens in Countries Using QALYs and Cost-Based Thresholds? See details below.
— ICER's QALY-Based Study Topics. See details below.
— Upcoming Events and Webinars. See details below.
— AHRQ Effective Program Updates. See details below.
— Job Openings. See details below.
— Statement from PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho on the Proposed Section 504 Rule. See details below.
— Letter from Over 1400 Researchers, Organizations and Individuals Opposing NIMHD Exclusion of People with Disabilities. See details below.
— PIPC Statement on Selection of Drugs Under Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program Guidance. Click here to read the statement.
— PIPC Offers Comments on Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies. Click here to read the letter.
— National Forum for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Annual Meeting October 26. Click here to register to attend in person or virtually.
— Emerging Threats in States for Use of Discriminatory Metrics. See details below.
— What Happens in Countries Using QALYs and Cost-Based Thresholds? See details below.
— ICER's QALY-Based Study Topics. See details below.
— Upcoming Events and Webinars. See details below.
— AHRQ Effective Program Updates. See details below.
— Job Openings. See details below.
What We're Reading
1. Statement from PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho on the Proposed Section 504 Rule.
PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho issued a statement on the Department of Health and Human Services' proposed rule on Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
“Since sponsoring the Americans with Disabilities Act in Congress, it has been clear to me that we have to remain vigilant in advocating for enforcement of disability rights laws. I appreciate that the proposed Section 504 rule announced today addresses some of the most important issues that too often were not given oversight from policymakers or the attention of enforcement agencies, yet can result in persons with disabilities being excluded from the benefits of health care programs and activities."
"It will be important for the disability community to comment on all aspects of the proposed rule, ranging from new requirements prohibiting discrimination in the areas of medical treatment; the use of value assessments; web, mobile, and kiosk accessibility; and requirements for accessible medical equipment. As Chair of the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) I was excited to see HHS recognize how value assessments devaluing people with disabilities may be used in violation of Section 504 to restrict access to care and we look forward to providing more in-depth comments on these provisions.”
2. Letter from Over 1400 Researchers, Organizations and Individuals Opposing NIMHD Exclusion of People with Disabilities. On September 8, 2023, letters signed by over 1400 researchers, organizations and individuals expressed opposition to the NIMHD Advisory Committee decision to reject a recommendation to add people with disabilities as a health disparity population. The NIMHD Advisory Committee did not include people with disabilities. Additionally, several people have weighed in about exponential health equity barriers that disabled people from intersecting marginalized groups face - including people of color, people from the LBGTQ+ community, people who live in rural areas, and people who have low incomes. The 2 letters urged the administration to advance a swift course correction on this issue and move to designate people with disabilities as a health disparity population. Click here to view the letter from 1290 people from the disability research community sharing an in-depth analysis about the flaws in this decision-making process. Click here to view the letter from 175 organizations and individuals sharing this analysis and similarly expressing concerns and calling for the recommendation to be reversed.
3. PIPC Statement on Selection of Drugs Under Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program Guidance. PIPC released a statement on the list of drugs that will be subject to Medicare price negotiation under the Inflation Reduction Act. "Many patients rely on these treatments for their health and quality of life, and they are the true experts on many of the questions CMS will be answering as part of negotiations. Therefore, we urge CMS to take this opportunity to develop a negotiation process that meaningfully engages patients and people with disabilities. Without input from affected patients and people with disabilities, CMS’ prices may not reflect the diversity of people on treatment or their preferred outcomes." Click here to read the statement.
4. PIPC Offers Comments on Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies. In a comment letter to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), PIPC offered feedback on the agency's Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies (TCET) notice. The letter stresses the importance of patients gaining quick and easy access to new technologies without delays and barriers that can lead to further declines in their health. "PIPC appreciates CMS establishing the TCET pathway and taking steps to make innovative devices available to patients with fewer barriers to access," wrote PIPC Chair Tony Coelho. "We would encourage CMS to consider more robust avenues to meaningfully engage patients and to ensure this pathway provides broad meaningful access to novel technologies." Click here to read the letter.
5. National Forum for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Annual Meeting October 26. The 2023 annual meeting of the National Forum for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention will focus on how to broaden support for policies, programs, and environmental changes that improve health and health equity: Health Equity Benefits Everyone: Changing the Narrative on Health Equity. Diverse Panels will discuss how we change the narrative on health equity, including a focus on: Vital Conditions for Well-Being, Reframing Prevention and Public Health, and Reducing the Mental Health Crisis and the Leading Cause of Death Together. Click here to register to attend in person or virtually.
Emerging Threats in States for Use of Discriminatory Metrics
Several states are considering policies that would reference entities such as the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), which calls the discriminatory quality-adjusted life year (QALY) the “gold standard” for value assessment, and others are considering policies to import QALY-based coverage and reimbursement decisions from other countries that restrict access to care. We encourage you to keep track of all state-based threats using this new website tracking state activities. Key issues are highlighted below.
Colorado
Colorado passed legislation in 2021 creating a Prescription Drug Affordability Review Board. The legislation included language stating that the Upper Payment Limit for selected drugs "shall not consider research or methods that employ a dollars-per-quality adjusted life year, or similar measure, that discounts the value of a life because of an individual's disability or age.” Nevertheless, the board’s rule governing affordability reviews specifically allows for use of the quality-adjusted life year measure, stating, "The Board may identify if the literature uses a quality-adjusted life-year analysis or a similar measure that discounts the value of a life because of an individual’s disability or age. The Board may use information that uses a quality-adjusted life year analysis to evaluate relative financial effects, but will not use quality adjusted life year analysis to determine an upper payment limit or other appropriate costs of a prescription drug. If quality-adjusted life year analysis is used during affordability review, the Board will acknowledge any health equity impacts to priority populations.”
Colorado has now selected the following five drugs to be reviewed for a possible Upper Payment Limit: Enbrel (rheumatoid arthritis), Genvoya (HIV), Cosentyx (psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis), Stelara (ulcerative colitis), Trikafta (cystic fibrosis). The “estimated cost effectiveness” of the drug is allowed for consideration. View the website for more information.
Similar to the Massachusetts Health Policy Commission, Colorado has contracted with the Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law (PORTAL), which also has a subcontract with ICER in Massachusetts for its work there. PORTAL supports the use of QALYs, as expressed in a JAMA commentary titled, "Congress’ Misguided Plan to Ban QALYs.” Presentations (including from PORTAL) related to cost effectiveness analyses to the Colorado Board have referenced the use of a cost-per-QALY or the equal value of life-year gained (evLYG) in estimating cost effectiveness of treatments. PORTAL and others have encouraged use of QALYs and evLYG calculations, which have been widely critiqued for failing to account for quality-of-life improvements and for being calculated using the QALY’s flawed health utilities. Several commenters raised concerns about the Board’s potential use of cost effectiveness analyses:
The Colorado Board will meet on September 15 at 12pm EST. Click here to register.
Pennsylvania
In the last legislative session, the legislature introduced, HB 1722, a bill creating a Prescription Drug Affordability Board that would not bar reference to QALYs and would explicitly authorize the Board to contract with a third party that could include ICER. The bill has not been reintroduced in 2023. The Pennsylvania legislature held an informational meeting on Prescription Drug Boards in the House Health Committee on April 12 at 10am. Click here to learn more about Prescription Drug Affordability Boards and the implications of discriminatory measures of cost effectiveness. Click here to learn more about the committee chair, Rep. Dan Frankel.
Massachusetts
An Act Advancing Health Care Research and Decision-Making Centered on Patients and People with disabilities, SD. 2117 and HD. 3356 has been introduced in both the House and Senate. This bill includes important patient protections including a ban on the discriminatory Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY).
Oregon
The Oregon legislature held a hearing on March 27, 2023 on SB 492, legislation that would address the use of biased measures of quality of life, such as quality-adjusted life years or QALYs. PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho submitted testimony stating, "This legislation reflects decades of work to advance disability rights and to end the use of discriminatory measures of the effectiveness of health care that too often drive barriers to care for people with disabilities. In the past this may have been considered just a disability issue, but today we recognize the implications of these biased algorithms for health equity more broadly.” Click here to view testimony from PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho. Click here to view testimony submitted by the Caring Ambassadors Program. Click here to view the list of organizations in Oregon supporting the bill.
On October 6, 2022, the Oregon Health Evidence Review Commission (HERC) discussed a proposed plan for using QALYs. The meeting followed CMS approval of Oregon’s waiver application, which does not bar the use of QALYs in the interim. Click here to read comments submitted by PIPC along with 62 other groups asking CMS to reject the waiver. Click here to view the CMS-approved waiver. At the HERC meeting, the Oregon Health Authority expressed its intent to continue using a prioritized list, shifting it from use under a waiver to use as part of the State Plan Amendment after the waiver expires in 2027. The HERC decided to accept comments on their use of QALYs but has not made a decision as to whether they will adjust their methodology. Click here to view the letter from almost 50 advocacy groups asking the HERC to stop using QALYs. Click here to view testimony from PIPC Chairman Coelho to the Oregon HERC expressing his support for the Americans with Disabilities Act. Click here to view the options that continue to be under consideration by the HERC to continue using QALYs. Click here to view all of the comments shared with PIPC.
International News: What Happens in Countries Using QALYs and Cost-Based Thresholds?
Other countries are often referenced as examples of how the use of QALYs or similar cost-based thresholds impact access to care.
ICER's QALY-Based Study Topics
The Institute for Clinical Economic Review (ICER) conducts cost effectiveness studies for insurers using the cost-per-QALY methodology. ICER provides guidance on its website for patients and patient advocates to provide direct input related to their experiences with the disease. Click here to provide patient input. Click here to view the topics and deadlines.
Upcoming Events and Webinars
PCORI Board of Governors Meeting
September 11, 2023
Click here to view.
2023 PCORI Annual Meeting
October 4-5, 2023
Click here to view.
Real World Evidence Conference
October 16-17, 2023
Click here to view.
Medical Journal Articles
Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments for Rheumatoid Arthritis in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review. Click here to read the article.
QALYs: The Math Doesn’t Work. Click here to read the article.
The Implementation of Value-Based Frameworks, Clinical Care Pathways, and Alternative Payment Models for Cancer Care in the United States. Click here to view.
Perspectives on Patient-Reported Outcome Data After Treatment Discontinuation in Cancer Clinical Trials. Click here to view.
The Implementation of Value-Based Frameworks, Clinical Care Pathways, and Alternative Payment Models for Cancer Care in the United States. Click here to view.
Federal Data for Conducting Patient-Centered Outcomes Research on Economic Outcomes. Click here to view.
Patient-Reported Outcomes for People with Diabetes: What and How to Measure? A Narrative Review. Click here to view.
Patient Engagement in Research; Benefits, Challenges, Importance, and Implications. Click here to view.
The Opportunity for Greater Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in Drug Development and Regulation. Click here to view.
AHRQ Effective Program Updates
Technical Brief: Measuring Healthcare Organization Characteristics in Cancer Care Delivery Research. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Postpartum Care up to 1 Year After Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Click here to view.
Draft Report: Impact of Healthcare Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and Healthcare. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Partian Breast Irradiation for Breast Cancer. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Use of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Era. Click here to view.
Research Report: Analysis of Requirements for Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) - Topic Refinement. Click here to view.
Technical Brief: Infection Prevention and Control for the Emergency Medical Services and 911 Workforce. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Management of Infantile Epilepsies. Click here to view.
1. Statement from PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho on the Proposed Section 504 Rule.
PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho issued a statement on the Department of Health and Human Services' proposed rule on Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
“Since sponsoring the Americans with Disabilities Act in Congress, it has been clear to me that we have to remain vigilant in advocating for enforcement of disability rights laws. I appreciate that the proposed Section 504 rule announced today addresses some of the most important issues that too often were not given oversight from policymakers or the attention of enforcement agencies, yet can result in persons with disabilities being excluded from the benefits of health care programs and activities."
"It will be important for the disability community to comment on all aspects of the proposed rule, ranging from new requirements prohibiting discrimination in the areas of medical treatment; the use of value assessments; web, mobile, and kiosk accessibility; and requirements for accessible medical equipment. As Chair of the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) I was excited to see HHS recognize how value assessments devaluing people with disabilities may be used in violation of Section 504 to restrict access to care and we look forward to providing more in-depth comments on these provisions.”
2. Letter from Over 1400 Researchers, Organizations and Individuals Opposing NIMHD Exclusion of People with Disabilities. On September 8, 2023, letters signed by over 1400 researchers, organizations and individuals expressed opposition to the NIMHD Advisory Committee decision to reject a recommendation to add people with disabilities as a health disparity population. The NIMHD Advisory Committee did not include people with disabilities. Additionally, several people have weighed in about exponential health equity barriers that disabled people from intersecting marginalized groups face - including people of color, people from the LBGTQ+ community, people who live in rural areas, and people who have low incomes. The 2 letters urged the administration to advance a swift course correction on this issue and move to designate people with disabilities as a health disparity population. Click here to view the letter from 1290 people from the disability research community sharing an in-depth analysis about the flaws in this decision-making process. Click here to view the letter from 175 organizations and individuals sharing this analysis and similarly expressing concerns and calling for the recommendation to be reversed.
3. PIPC Statement on Selection of Drugs Under Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program Guidance. PIPC released a statement on the list of drugs that will be subject to Medicare price negotiation under the Inflation Reduction Act. "Many patients rely on these treatments for their health and quality of life, and they are the true experts on many of the questions CMS will be answering as part of negotiations. Therefore, we urge CMS to take this opportunity to develop a negotiation process that meaningfully engages patients and people with disabilities. Without input from affected patients and people with disabilities, CMS’ prices may not reflect the diversity of people on treatment or their preferred outcomes." Click here to read the statement.
4. PIPC Offers Comments on Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies. In a comment letter to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), PIPC offered feedback on the agency's Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies (TCET) notice. The letter stresses the importance of patients gaining quick and easy access to new technologies without delays and barriers that can lead to further declines in their health. "PIPC appreciates CMS establishing the TCET pathway and taking steps to make innovative devices available to patients with fewer barriers to access," wrote PIPC Chair Tony Coelho. "We would encourage CMS to consider more robust avenues to meaningfully engage patients and to ensure this pathway provides broad meaningful access to novel technologies." Click here to read the letter.
5. National Forum for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Annual Meeting October 26. The 2023 annual meeting of the National Forum for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention will focus on how to broaden support for policies, programs, and environmental changes that improve health and health equity: Health Equity Benefits Everyone: Changing the Narrative on Health Equity. Diverse Panels will discuss how we change the narrative on health equity, including a focus on: Vital Conditions for Well-Being, Reframing Prevention and Public Health, and Reducing the Mental Health Crisis and the Leading Cause of Death Together. Click here to register to attend in person or virtually.
Emerging Threats in States for Use of Discriminatory Metrics
Several states are considering policies that would reference entities such as the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), which calls the discriminatory quality-adjusted life year (QALY) the “gold standard” for value assessment, and others are considering policies to import QALY-based coverage and reimbursement decisions from other countries that restrict access to care. We encourage you to keep track of all state-based threats using this new website tracking state activities. Key issues are highlighted below.
- Click here to learn more about the potential for Prescription Drug Affordability Boards to discriminate by incorporating the use of QALYS.
- Click here to view the Value Our Health state template legislation that would protect people with disabilities and chronic conditions from the use of QALYs and similar metrics developed by third parties such as ICER in decisions related to reimbursement and coverage, as well as ensure their engagement in decision-making.
- Click here to view a one pager about the flaws in ICER’s methodology.
- Click here to view information from experts on the downside of referencing foreign countries.
- Click here to learn about statutory protections against use of QALYs.
Colorado
Colorado passed legislation in 2021 creating a Prescription Drug Affordability Review Board. The legislation included language stating that the Upper Payment Limit for selected drugs "shall not consider research or methods that employ a dollars-per-quality adjusted life year, or similar measure, that discounts the value of a life because of an individual's disability or age.” Nevertheless, the board’s rule governing affordability reviews specifically allows for use of the quality-adjusted life year measure, stating, "The Board may identify if the literature uses a quality-adjusted life-year analysis or a similar measure that discounts the value of a life because of an individual’s disability or age. The Board may use information that uses a quality-adjusted life year analysis to evaluate relative financial effects, but will not use quality adjusted life year analysis to determine an upper payment limit or other appropriate costs of a prescription drug. If quality-adjusted life year analysis is used during affordability review, the Board will acknowledge any health equity impacts to priority populations.”
Colorado has now selected the following five drugs to be reviewed for a possible Upper Payment Limit: Enbrel (rheumatoid arthritis), Genvoya (HIV), Cosentyx (psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis), Stelara (ulcerative colitis), Trikafta (cystic fibrosis). The “estimated cost effectiveness” of the drug is allowed for consideration. View the website for more information.
Similar to the Massachusetts Health Policy Commission, Colorado has contracted with the Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law (PORTAL), which also has a subcontract with ICER in Massachusetts for its work there. PORTAL supports the use of QALYs, as expressed in a JAMA commentary titled, "Congress’ Misguided Plan to Ban QALYs.” Presentations (including from PORTAL) related to cost effectiveness analyses to the Colorado Board have referenced the use of a cost-per-QALY or the equal value of life-year gained (evLYG) in estimating cost effectiveness of treatments. PORTAL and others have encouraged use of QALYs and evLYG calculations, which have been widely critiqued for failing to account for quality-of-life improvements and for being calculated using the QALY’s flawed health utilities. Several commenters raised concerns about the Board’s potential use of cost effectiveness analyses:
- Arthritis Foundation: "However, data inputs used to calculate QALYs do not holistically reflect patient experiences, preferences, goals and benefit-risk tolerance.”
- NORD: "Complexities associated with rare disease therapies and the available data to determine their cost-effectiveness create unique challenges for determining fair prices for these products.”
- Rare disease orgs: "We are writing out of concern that some decisions made by the Prescription Drug Affordability Board (PDAB) could have a severely detrimental effect on families struggling with rare and severe diseases, making it more difficult for them to have access to the therapies they need and slowing the critical research that offers them the promise of a better life."
- U.S. Hereditary Angioedema Association: "In our experience, efforts by payers to assess value and cost for the HAE community rarely consider the disability, death, pain, and fear associated with the condition."
The Colorado Board will meet on September 15 at 12pm EST. Click here to register.
Pennsylvania
In the last legislative session, the legislature introduced, HB 1722, a bill creating a Prescription Drug Affordability Board that would not bar reference to QALYs and would explicitly authorize the Board to contract with a third party that could include ICER. The bill has not been reintroduced in 2023. The Pennsylvania legislature held an informational meeting on Prescription Drug Boards in the House Health Committee on April 12 at 10am. Click here to learn more about Prescription Drug Affordability Boards and the implications of discriminatory measures of cost effectiveness. Click here to learn more about the committee chair, Rep. Dan Frankel.
Massachusetts
An Act Advancing Health Care Research and Decision-Making Centered on Patients and People with disabilities, SD. 2117 and HD. 3356 has been introduced in both the House and Senate. This bill includes important patient protections including a ban on the discriminatory Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY).
Oregon
The Oregon legislature held a hearing on March 27, 2023 on SB 492, legislation that would address the use of biased measures of quality of life, such as quality-adjusted life years or QALYs. PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho submitted testimony stating, "This legislation reflects decades of work to advance disability rights and to end the use of discriminatory measures of the effectiveness of health care that too often drive barriers to care for people with disabilities. In the past this may have been considered just a disability issue, but today we recognize the implications of these biased algorithms for health equity more broadly.” Click here to view testimony from PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho. Click here to view testimony submitted by the Caring Ambassadors Program. Click here to view the list of organizations in Oregon supporting the bill.
On October 6, 2022, the Oregon Health Evidence Review Commission (HERC) discussed a proposed plan for using QALYs. The meeting followed CMS approval of Oregon’s waiver application, which does not bar the use of QALYs in the interim. Click here to read comments submitted by PIPC along with 62 other groups asking CMS to reject the waiver. Click here to view the CMS-approved waiver. At the HERC meeting, the Oregon Health Authority expressed its intent to continue using a prioritized list, shifting it from use under a waiver to use as part of the State Plan Amendment after the waiver expires in 2027. The HERC decided to accept comments on their use of QALYs but has not made a decision as to whether they will adjust their methodology. Click here to view the letter from almost 50 advocacy groups asking the HERC to stop using QALYs. Click here to view testimony from PIPC Chairman Coelho to the Oregon HERC expressing his support for the Americans with Disabilities Act. Click here to view the options that continue to be under consideration by the HERC to continue using QALYs. Click here to view all of the comments shared with PIPC.
International News: What Happens in Countries Using QALYs and Cost-Based Thresholds?
Other countries are often referenced as examples of how the use of QALYs or similar cost-based thresholds impact access to care.
- Australia: MS patients in Australia face limited choices with respect to effective treatments covered, and some are forced to raise money for treatment overseas.
- U.K: The family of a patient with MS has had to turn to crowdfunding for treatment that is not funded through the NHS.
ICER's QALY-Based Study Topics
The Institute for Clinical Economic Review (ICER) conducts cost effectiveness studies for insurers using the cost-per-QALY methodology. ICER provides guidance on its website for patients and patient advocates to provide direct input related to their experiences with the disease. Click here to provide patient input. Click here to view the topics and deadlines.
- Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria: Draft Scoping Document Available. Comments due August 14, 2023.
- Schizophrenia: Draft Scoping Document available. Comments due on July 26, 2023.
- Metachromatic Leukodystrophy: Draft Evidence Report now available.
- Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Draft Scoping Document available. Open for comments until June 5, 2023.
- Sickle Cell Disease: Evidence Report Available. California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF) to meet on July 27, 2023, to review.
- Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis: Final Evidence Report now available.
Upcoming Events and Webinars
PCORI Board of Governors Meeting
September 11, 2023
Click here to view.
2023 PCORI Annual Meeting
October 4-5, 2023
Click here to view.
Real World Evidence Conference
October 16-17, 2023
Click here to view.
Medical Journal Articles
Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments for Rheumatoid Arthritis in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review. Click here to read the article.
QALYs: The Math Doesn’t Work. Click here to read the article.
The Implementation of Value-Based Frameworks, Clinical Care Pathways, and Alternative Payment Models for Cancer Care in the United States. Click here to view.
Perspectives on Patient-Reported Outcome Data After Treatment Discontinuation in Cancer Clinical Trials. Click here to view.
The Implementation of Value-Based Frameworks, Clinical Care Pathways, and Alternative Payment Models for Cancer Care in the United States. Click here to view.
Federal Data for Conducting Patient-Centered Outcomes Research on Economic Outcomes. Click here to view.
Patient-Reported Outcomes for People with Diabetes: What and How to Measure? A Narrative Review. Click here to view.
Patient Engagement in Research; Benefits, Challenges, Importance, and Implications. Click here to view.
The Opportunity for Greater Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in Drug Development and Regulation. Click here to view.
AHRQ Effective Program Updates
Technical Brief: Measuring Healthcare Organization Characteristics in Cancer Care Delivery Research. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Postpartum Care up to 1 Year After Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Click here to view.
Draft Report: Impact of Healthcare Algorithms on Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health and Healthcare. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Partian Breast Irradiation for Breast Cancer. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Use of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Era. Click here to view.
Research Report: Analysis of Requirements for Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) - Topic Refinement. Click here to view.
Technical Brief: Infection Prevention and Control for the Emergency Medical Services and 911 Workforce. Click here to view.
Systematic Review: Management of Infantile Epilepsies. Click here to view.
