In This Week’s Issue:
1. PCORI Board of Governors to Meet Today, Discussing Research Strategy and Hepatitis C Funding, click here for the agenda.
2. Mathematica Webinar on PCORI Dissemination and Implementation Plan, click here to register.
3. PIPC signs on to Appeal From Patient Organizations On Clinical Pathways, click here to view the full letter.
4. PCORI Announces $4 Million in Grants to Expand Pipeline to Proposal Initiative, click here to view the full announcement.
5. New AHRQ Tools Available To Support Shared Decision-Making, click here to view the tool.
6. CQ Health Beat: NIH Pushes to Centralize Patient-Protection Pacts, click here to view the full article.
7. JCO: Debating the Oncologist's Role in Defining the Value of Cancer Care: We Have a Duty to Society, click here to view the full article.
8. Upcoming Events and Webinars, see details below.
9. Medical Journal Articles, see details below.
10. AHRQ Effective Program Updates, see details below.
1. PCORI Board of Governors to Meet Today, Discussing Research Strategy and Hepatitis C Funding, click here for the agenda.
2. Mathematica Webinar on PCORI Dissemination and Implementation Plan, click here to register.
3. PIPC signs on to Appeal From Patient Organizations On Clinical Pathways, click here to view the full letter.
4. PCORI Announces $4 Million in Grants to Expand Pipeline to Proposal Initiative, click here to view the full announcement.
5. New AHRQ Tools Available To Support Shared Decision-Making, click here to view the tool.
6. CQ Health Beat: NIH Pushes to Centralize Patient-Protection Pacts, click here to view the full article.
7. JCO: Debating the Oncologist's Role in Defining the Value of Cancer Care: We Have a Duty to Society, click here to view the full article.
8. Upcoming Events and Webinars, see details below.
9. Medical Journal Articles, see details below.
10. AHRQ Effective Program Updates, see details below.
1. PCORI Board of Governors to Meet Today, Discussing Research Strategy and Hepatitis C Funding
The PCORI Board of Governors meets today in Washington, DC at the Renaissance in Dupont Circle to discuss its agenda. Among the topics, the Board will discuss its research strategy, hepatitis C funding and PCORnet. The Board will hear public comments at 5:30pm EST. Click here for the agenda.
2. Mathematica Webinar on PCORI Dissemination and Implementation Plan
Per release, "PCORI has commissioned Mathematica Policy Research and its partners, AcademyHealth and Palladian Partners, to create a D&I Framework and Toolkit. These documents will help our team develop and execute strategic plans for sharing new information with key stakeholders. PCORI will also use the documents to ensure that important health care findings reach those who need them to make informed decisions. We will host a workshop and webinar on Wednesday, December 10, to review the draft D&I Framework and Toolkit and gather direct, actionable feedback from stakeholders." The webinar will be held on Wednesday, December 10 from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET. Click here to register.
And Bloomberg News also reported on the announcement, “A Dec. 3 statement from Mathematica Policy Research said it, along with AcademyHealth, Palladian Partners and WebMD, were commissioned by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) to develop the framework and toolkit ‘to accelerate the improvement of health care delivery and outcomes by helping PCORI develop and execute strategic plans for sharing new information with stakeholders and putting new evidence into practice.’” Click here for details.
3. PIPC Signs On to Appeal From Patient Organizations On Clinical Pathways
Recently, PIPC and other patient organizations signed on to a letter from the National Patient Advocate Foundation (NPAF) to individual state insurance commissioners, as well as the National Association of State Insurance Commissioners and America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), "In order to ensure that patients are receiving the most effective and appropriate care, and to ensure that patients maintain the utmost confidence in the delivery of their care, physicians must have the freedom to consider a range of viable treatment options and, with the patient, carefully weigh the risks, benefits, and costs associated with them without regard to the reimbursement or incentive attached to a particular course of therapy. Direct monetary payments from insurance companies to physicians as a reward for prescribing a therapy that adheres to a restricted list of options determined by the insurer could compromise that trust and influence the treating physician to prefer one therapy over another, potentially with the unintended consequence of selecting a course of treatment that is not in the best interest of the individual patient being treated. While we understand and sympathize with the need for finding solutions that help to keep health care affordable and limit the impact of high costs to patients, particularly for areas of treatment that may not be fruitful. To that end, we strongly urge payers to take steps to ensure that their beneficiaries have the information they need to make informed choices with their physicians about what treatments to pursue." Click here to view the full letter.
4. PCORI Announces $4 Million in Grants to Expand Pipeline to Proposal Initiative
At the end of November, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) announced the availability of up to $4 million in fiscal year 2015 to expand on an initiative that is working to develop a nationwide community of patients, researchers and stakeholders participating in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR).
Specifically, through seed funding the "Pipeline to Proposal" is intended to strengthen "relationships between researchers, patients, and stakeholders, particularly in communities that have historically been underrepresented in research, [build] capacity for community partnerships to create research questions and submit patient-centered research proposals that can be considered for PCORI funding, [increase] the number of patients, researchers, and other stakeholders who have the ability to participate in PCOR, and [identify] the most promising methods for engaging, and communicating with, patients, researchers, and other stakeholders in PCOR and conveying those lessons to current and future PCORI awardees.
PCORI notes that the Pipeline program provides tiered awards and "leads recipients through a collaborative process that begins with a shared health interest, builds the project participants' knowledge and capacity to participate in CER, and culminates in a funding proposal." The tiers are as follows:
-Tier I Awards – Up to $15,000 per award for a nine-month term to support relationship development. Patients, physicians, researchers, or other stakeholders create partnerships, and begin developing governance structures, communications plans, and potential research questions.
-Tier II Awards – Up to $25,000 per award for a one-year term to support capacity building. These awards are available to successful Tier I awardees to help them strengthen and expand their partnerships and research plans.
-Tier III Awards – Up to $50,000 per award for a one-year term to support proposal development. These awards support fully formed research teams in developing a high-quality, patient-centered CER proposal. Groups that have not received Tier I and II awards are eligible to apply as well as those who have successfully completed those tiers. Tier III will be announced in early 2015.
Click here to view the full announcement.
5. New AHRQ Tools Available To Support Shared Decision-Making
In a press release last week, "AHRQ is offering tools to support health care providers who seek to use patient-centered outcomes research findings in shared decision-making. The tools and upcoming train-the-trainer workshops are part of the Agency’s SHARE Approach, a five-step process aimed at increasing the use of evidence in shared decision-making between health care providers and patients. The SHARE Approach tools include reference guides, posters and other resources that support shared decision-making in clinical practice settings. Workshop participants are encouraged to train other clinicians to implement the SHARE Approach in their own organizations. Click here to view the tool.
6. CQ Health Beat: NIH Pushes to Centralize Patient-Protection Pacts
Kerry Young, writing for CQ HealthBeat, reported last week, “Both federally funded research studies and those paid for by companies now may involve securing approvals from IRB panels at many different sites. Researchers say the approach contributes to delays without offering increased protection for the people testing new medicines and devices or approaches to health care.[…] ‘Maintaining the highest ethical standards in the research we fund is of utmost importance,’ said NIH Director Francis S. Collins in a statement. ‘By using single IRBs in multi-site studies, we reduce duplication of effort, speed the initiation of important research, and save time and taxpayer funds.’[...] The NIH draft proposal calls for allowing exceptions in cases where a local IRB review is needed to address the needs of certain participants, or in cases where this may be required by specific federal, state or tribal laws or regulations. NIH is seeking comments on the draft proposal through January 29.” Click here to view the full article.
7. JCO: Debating the Oncologist's Role in Defining the Value of Cancer Care: We Have a Duty to Society
Recently, Reshma Jagsi commented in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, “[P]hysicians should, where practicable, also participate in the development of comparative effectiveness research, clinical practice guidelines, care pathways, and demonstration projects that evaluate innovative approaches to payment to reward the provision of high-quality and affordable care...[P]hysicians should also be active advocates in the political system, leveraging the lobbying resources of their professional organizations to encourage systems-level changes that eliminate perverse incentives toward the provision of low-value care.” Click here to view the full article.
8. Medical Journal Articles
Identifying and Selecting New Procedures for Health Technology Assessment: A Decade of NICE Experience in the United Kingdom: Click here to view.
Editorial: A Practical Approach to Evidence-Based Medicine: Click here to view.
Enhancing Cancer Registry Data for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Project: Overview and Methodology: Click here to view.
Enhancing Cancer Registry Data for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Project: Overview and Methodology: Click here to view.
Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Monotherapy With Cytotoxic Agents in Triple-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer in a Community Setting: Click here to view.
Comment & Respond: Comparative Effectiveness of Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab in the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials: Click here to view.
The Application of Health Technology Assessment in Osteoporosis: Click here to view.
Comparative Effectiveness and Practice Variation in Neonatal Care: Click here to view.
Impact of Evidence and Health Policy on Nursing Practice: Click here to view.
A Systematic Review of Health Technology Assessment Tools in Sub-Saharan Africa: Methodological Issues and Implications: Click here to view.
Best Practices: Improving Patient Outcomes and Costs in an ACO Through Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management: Click here to view.
9. AHRQ Effective Program Updates
Strategies to Treat and Manage Infantile Hemangioma: Click here to view the research protocol.
The PCORI Board of Governors meets today in Washington, DC at the Renaissance in Dupont Circle to discuss its agenda. Among the topics, the Board will discuss its research strategy, hepatitis C funding and PCORnet. The Board will hear public comments at 5:30pm EST. Click here for the agenda.
2. Mathematica Webinar on PCORI Dissemination and Implementation Plan
Per release, "PCORI has commissioned Mathematica Policy Research and its partners, AcademyHealth and Palladian Partners, to create a D&I Framework and Toolkit. These documents will help our team develop and execute strategic plans for sharing new information with key stakeholders. PCORI will also use the documents to ensure that important health care findings reach those who need them to make informed decisions. We will host a workshop and webinar on Wednesday, December 10, to review the draft D&I Framework and Toolkit and gather direct, actionable feedback from stakeholders." The webinar will be held on Wednesday, December 10 from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET. Click here to register.
And Bloomberg News also reported on the announcement, “A Dec. 3 statement from Mathematica Policy Research said it, along with AcademyHealth, Palladian Partners and WebMD, were commissioned by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) to develop the framework and toolkit ‘to accelerate the improvement of health care delivery and outcomes by helping PCORI develop and execute strategic plans for sharing new information with stakeholders and putting new evidence into practice.’” Click here for details.
3. PIPC Signs On to Appeal From Patient Organizations On Clinical Pathways
Recently, PIPC and other patient organizations signed on to a letter from the National Patient Advocate Foundation (NPAF) to individual state insurance commissioners, as well as the National Association of State Insurance Commissioners and America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), "In order to ensure that patients are receiving the most effective and appropriate care, and to ensure that patients maintain the utmost confidence in the delivery of their care, physicians must have the freedom to consider a range of viable treatment options and, with the patient, carefully weigh the risks, benefits, and costs associated with them without regard to the reimbursement or incentive attached to a particular course of therapy. Direct monetary payments from insurance companies to physicians as a reward for prescribing a therapy that adheres to a restricted list of options determined by the insurer could compromise that trust and influence the treating physician to prefer one therapy over another, potentially with the unintended consequence of selecting a course of treatment that is not in the best interest of the individual patient being treated. While we understand and sympathize with the need for finding solutions that help to keep health care affordable and limit the impact of high costs to patients, particularly for areas of treatment that may not be fruitful. To that end, we strongly urge payers to take steps to ensure that their beneficiaries have the information they need to make informed choices with their physicians about what treatments to pursue." Click here to view the full letter.
4. PCORI Announces $4 Million in Grants to Expand Pipeline to Proposal Initiative
At the end of November, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) announced the availability of up to $4 million in fiscal year 2015 to expand on an initiative that is working to develop a nationwide community of patients, researchers and stakeholders participating in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR).
Specifically, through seed funding the "Pipeline to Proposal" is intended to strengthen "relationships between researchers, patients, and stakeholders, particularly in communities that have historically been underrepresented in research, [build] capacity for community partnerships to create research questions and submit patient-centered research proposals that can be considered for PCORI funding, [increase] the number of patients, researchers, and other stakeholders who have the ability to participate in PCOR, and [identify] the most promising methods for engaging, and communicating with, patients, researchers, and other stakeholders in PCOR and conveying those lessons to current and future PCORI awardees.
PCORI notes that the Pipeline program provides tiered awards and "leads recipients through a collaborative process that begins with a shared health interest, builds the project participants' knowledge and capacity to participate in CER, and culminates in a funding proposal." The tiers are as follows:
-Tier I Awards – Up to $15,000 per award for a nine-month term to support relationship development. Patients, physicians, researchers, or other stakeholders create partnerships, and begin developing governance structures, communications plans, and potential research questions.
-Tier II Awards – Up to $25,000 per award for a one-year term to support capacity building. These awards are available to successful Tier I awardees to help them strengthen and expand their partnerships and research plans.
-Tier III Awards – Up to $50,000 per award for a one-year term to support proposal development. These awards support fully formed research teams in developing a high-quality, patient-centered CER proposal. Groups that have not received Tier I and II awards are eligible to apply as well as those who have successfully completed those tiers. Tier III will be announced in early 2015.
Click here to view the full announcement.
5. New AHRQ Tools Available To Support Shared Decision-Making
In a press release last week, "AHRQ is offering tools to support health care providers who seek to use patient-centered outcomes research findings in shared decision-making. The tools and upcoming train-the-trainer workshops are part of the Agency’s SHARE Approach, a five-step process aimed at increasing the use of evidence in shared decision-making between health care providers and patients. The SHARE Approach tools include reference guides, posters and other resources that support shared decision-making in clinical practice settings. Workshop participants are encouraged to train other clinicians to implement the SHARE Approach in their own organizations. Click here to view the tool.
6. CQ Health Beat: NIH Pushes to Centralize Patient-Protection Pacts
Kerry Young, writing for CQ HealthBeat, reported last week, “Both federally funded research studies and those paid for by companies now may involve securing approvals from IRB panels at many different sites. Researchers say the approach contributes to delays without offering increased protection for the people testing new medicines and devices or approaches to health care.[…] ‘Maintaining the highest ethical standards in the research we fund is of utmost importance,’ said NIH Director Francis S. Collins in a statement. ‘By using single IRBs in multi-site studies, we reduce duplication of effort, speed the initiation of important research, and save time and taxpayer funds.’[...] The NIH draft proposal calls for allowing exceptions in cases where a local IRB review is needed to address the needs of certain participants, or in cases where this may be required by specific federal, state or tribal laws or regulations. NIH is seeking comments on the draft proposal through January 29.” Click here to view the full article.
7. JCO: Debating the Oncologist's Role in Defining the Value of Cancer Care: We Have a Duty to Society
Recently, Reshma Jagsi commented in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, “[P]hysicians should, where practicable, also participate in the development of comparative effectiveness research, clinical practice guidelines, care pathways, and demonstration projects that evaluate innovative approaches to payment to reward the provision of high-quality and affordable care...[P]hysicians should also be active advocates in the political system, leveraging the lobbying resources of their professional organizations to encourage systems-level changes that eliminate perverse incentives toward the provision of low-value care.” Click here to view the full article.
8. Medical Journal Articles
Identifying and Selecting New Procedures for Health Technology Assessment: A Decade of NICE Experience in the United Kingdom: Click here to view.
Editorial: A Practical Approach to Evidence-Based Medicine: Click here to view.
Enhancing Cancer Registry Data for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Project: Overview and Methodology: Click here to view.
Enhancing Cancer Registry Data for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Project: Overview and Methodology: Click here to view.
Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Monotherapy With Cytotoxic Agents in Triple-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer in a Community Setting: Click here to view.
Comment & Respond: Comparative Effectiveness of Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab in the Comparison of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Treatments Trials: Click here to view.
The Application of Health Technology Assessment in Osteoporosis: Click here to view.
Comparative Effectiveness and Practice Variation in Neonatal Care: Click here to view.
Impact of Evidence and Health Policy on Nursing Practice: Click here to view.
A Systematic Review of Health Technology Assessment Tools in Sub-Saharan Africa: Methodological Issues and Implications: Click here to view.
Best Practices: Improving Patient Outcomes and Costs in an ACO Through Comprehensive Medication Therapy Management: Click here to view.
9. AHRQ Effective Program Updates
Strategies to Treat and Manage Infantile Hemangioma: Click here to view the research protocol.
