When deciding how to address a health problem, patients and those who care for them often need to choose between two or more options. To make the best decision, they must have reliable information about the options’ potential benefits and harms.
Often today, the available evidence may be incomplete, not consider the outcomes most relevant to patients, or not apply to certain patient populations, such as the very young, the very old, or those with several medical conditions. Clinical research can fill such evidence gaps.
Assessment of Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment Options is one of PCORI’s five national priorities for research. This priority focuses on developing new evidence for comparing the effectiveness and safety of different clinical options to see which ones work best for different people with a particular health condition or concern.
Our Clinical Effectiveness Research (CER) program funds and manages research initiatives related to this priority. As instructed by our authorizing legislation, we are interested in comparative clinical effectiveness research across a broad range of clinical conditions and patient populations.
Our CER program seeks to fund research that compares the outcomes of two or more healthcare options already shown to be efficacious. The topics are not limited to medical or surgical therapy and may include complementary medicine and self-care. We are particularly interested in randomized trials conducted in typical clinical populations and addressing the full range of relevant patient-centered outcomes. We also invite studies that, while comparing at least two treatment approaches, investigate variation in outcomes, with attention to demographic, biological, clinical, social, economic, geographic, and other factors.
Posted: September 10, 2014; Updated: December 13, 2016