​In comments delivered at today’s PCORI board meeting, PIPC Steering Committee member Katie Orrico commented that it is important to engage the broader community in all aspects of PCORI’s decision-making, not just share decisions after they are made.  She explained that allowing for adequate, equal, and broad stakeholder representation throughout PCORI’s research priority setting process could foster more rapid adoption and use of research results.  A copy of Ms. Orrico’s comments is available below.

In partnership with the National Health Council and the National Working Group On Evidence-Based Health Care, PIPC has submitted comments to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) regarding appointees to the PCORI Board of Governors.  Considering that Andrew Imparato, President and CEO of the American Association of People with Disabilities, is not be able to serve on the PCORI Board of Governors due to his new position with the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, the letter strongly urges the GAO to appoint another representative of the patient advocacy community to again fill this position.

This paper inventories and discusses the basic elements of the framework for comparative clinical effectiveness research that are identified in PPACA: requirements for stakeholder participation in comparative clinical effectiveness research; requirements for transparency in procedures and operations; requirements for public opportunity to comment on research priorities and to be engaged in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) review processes; and requirements for open decision-making processes. This paper also compares these requirements to current procedures developed and used by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to conduct comparative effectiveness research through its Effective Health Care Program and through the funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).