How to Trip Rapid Review

Step 1: Select articles relevant to your search (remember the system is only optimised for single intervention studies)

Step 2: press

Step 3: review the result, and maybe amend the or if you know better! If we're unsure of the overall sentiment of the trial we will display the conclusion under the article title. We then require you to tell us what the correct sentiment is.

1,437 results for

("comparative effectiveness studies" OR "comparative effectiveness research")

by
...
Alerts

Export results

Use check boxes to select individual results below

SmartSearch available

Trip's SmartSearch engine has discovered connected searches & results. Click to show

1. Living network meta-analysis compared with pairwise meta-analysis in comparative effectiveness research: empirical study. (PubMed)

Living network meta-analysis compared with pairwise meta-analysis in comparative effectiveness research: empirical study. To examine whether the continuous updating of networks of prospectively planned randomised controlled trials (RCTs) ("living" network meta-analysis) provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis in comparative effectiveness of medical interventions earlier than the updating of conventional, pairwise meta-analysis.Empirical study of the accumulating evidence about (...) comparisons after strong evidence had become evident in network meta-analysis.In comparative effectiveness research, prospectively planned living network meta-analyses produced strong evidence against the null hypothesis more often and earlier than conventional, pairwise meta-analyses.Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 BMJ

2. Time-dependent biases in observational studies of comparative effectiveness research in rheumatology. A methodological review. (PubMed)

Time-dependent biases in observational studies of comparative effectiveness research in rheumatology. A methodological review. To assess to what extent time-dependent biases (ie, immortal time bias (ITB) and time-lag bias (TLB)) occur in the latest rheumatology observational studies, describe their main mechanisms and increase the awareness on this topic.We searched PubMed for observational studies on rheumatic diseases published in leading medical journals in the last 5 years. Only studies

2019 Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases

3. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries. (PubMed)

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: An updated systematic review and involvement of low and middle income countries. Core outcome sets (COS) comprise a minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all trials for a specific health condition. The COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative maintains an up to date, publicly accessible online database of published and ongoing COS. An annual systematic review update

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 PLoS ONE

4. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 4th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research. (PubMed)

Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: 4th annual update to a systematic review of core outcome sets for research. The Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database is a publically available, searchable repository of published and ongoing core outcome set (COS) studies. An annual systematic review update is carried out to maintain the currency of database content.The methods used in the fourth update of the systematic review followed the same

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 PLoS ONE

5. Employer, Insurer, and Industry Perspectives on Patient-Centered Comparative Effectiveness Research: Final Report (PubMed)

Employer, Insurer, and Industry Perspectives on Patient-Centered Comparative Effectiveness Research: Final Report The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is an independent, nonprofit, nongovernmental organization authorized under the Affordable Care Act of 2010 and funded by Congress to help close the gaps in research needed to improve key health outcomes. To do this, PCORI identifies critical research questions, funds patient-centered comparative effectiveness research (CER

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2016 Rand health quarterly

6. The learning health system: trial design and participant consent in comparative effectiveness research. (PubMed)

The learning health system: trial design and participant consent in comparative effectiveness research. 29688309 2018 04 24 1522-9645 2018 Apr 23 European heart journal Eur. Heart J. The learning health system: trial design and participant consent in comparative effectiveness research. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy235 Webster Mark M Green Lane Cardiovascular Service, Auckland City Hospital, Private Bag 92024, Victoria St West, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. Stewart Ralph R Green Lane Cardiovascular

2018 European Heart Journal

7. Using Bayesian Adaptive Trial Designs for Comparative Effectiveness Research: A Virtual Trial Execution. (PubMed)

Using Bayesian Adaptive Trial Designs for Comparative Effectiveness Research: A Virtual Trial Execution. Bayesian and adaptive clinical trial designs offer the potential for more efficient processes that result in lower sample sizes and shorter trial durations than traditional designs.To explore the use and potential benefits of Bayesian adaptive clinical trial designs in comparative effectiveness research.Virtual execution of ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent (...) adaptive trial randomly assigned more patients to the better-performing group and would probably have ended slightly earlier.This virtual trial execution required limited resampling of ALLHAT patients for inclusion in RE-ADAPT (REsearch in ADAptive methods for Pragmatic Trials). Involvement of a data monitoring committee and other trial logistics were not considered.In a comparative effectiveness research trial, Bayesian adaptive trial designs are a feasible approach and potentially generate earlier

2016 Annals of Internal Medicine

8. How Big Data, Comparative Effectiveness Research, and Rapid-Learning Health-Care Systems Can Transform Patient Care in Radiation Oncology (PubMed)

How Big Data, Comparative Effectiveness Research, and Rapid-Learning Health-Care Systems Can Transform Patient Care in Radiation Oncology Big data and comparative effectiveness research methodologies can be applied within the framework of a rapid-learning health-care system (RLHCS) to accelerate discovery and to help turn the dream of fully personalized medicine into a reality. We synthesize recent advances in genomics with trends in big data to provide a forward-looking perspective

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 Frontiers in oncology

9. Comparative Effectiveness Research to Improve the Health of Sexual and Gender Minority Patients Through Cultural Competence and Skill Training of Community Health Center Providers and Non-clinical Staff

Comparative Effectiveness Research to Improve the Health of Sexual and Gender Minority Patients Through Cultural Competence and Skill Training of Community Health Center Providers and Non-clinical Staff Comparative Effectiveness Research to Improve the Health of Sexual and Gender Minority Patients Through Cultural Competence and Skill Training of Community Health Center Providers and Non-clinical Staff - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer (...) to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more. Comparative Effectiveness Research to Improve the Health of Sexual and Gender Minority Patients Through Cultural Competence and Skill Training of Community Health Center Providers and Non-clinical Staff The safety and scientific validity of this study

2018 Clinical Trials

10. Kids FACE FEARS Comparative Effectiveness Research

Kids FACE FEARS Comparative Effectiveness Research Kids FACE FEARS Comparative Effectiveness Research - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more. Kids FACE FEARS Comparative Effectiveness Research (...) Summary: The Kids FACE FEARS (Kids Face-to-face And Computer-Enhanced Formats Effectiveness study for Anxiety and Related Symptoms) is a large pragmatic comparative effectiveness study evaluating face-to-face vs. online cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for the treatment of child and adolescent anxiety. Families will be recruited from pediatric health centers serving primarily racial/ethnic minority youth in urban, suburban, and semi-rural regions. Patient-centered outcomes will be evaluated across

2018 Clinical Trials

11. Virtual Lifestyle Medicine Comparative Effectiveness Research

Virtual Lifestyle Medicine Comparative Effectiveness Research Virtual Lifestyle Medicine Comparative Effectiveness Research - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov Hide glossary Glossary Study record managers: refer to the if submitting registration or results information. Search for terms x × Study Record Detail Saved Studies Save this study Warning You have reached the maximum number of saved studies (100). Please remove one or more studies before adding more. Virtual Lifestyle Medicine (...) Comparative Effectiveness Research The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our for details. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03731481 Recruitment Status : Completed First Posted : November 6, 2018 Last Update Posted : November 6, 2018 Sponsor: Ohio University Collaborators: Live Healthy Appalachia Ardmore Institute of Health OhioHealth Lifestyle

2018 Clinical Trials

12. Researchers, Patients, and Stakeholders Evaluating Comparative-Effectiveness Research: A Mixed-Methods Study of the PCORI Reviewer Experience. (PubMed)

Researchers, Patients, and Stakeholders Evaluating Comparative-Effectiveness Research: A Mixed-Methods Study of the PCORI Reviewer Experience. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) includes patients and stakeholders alongside scientists in reviewing research applications using unique review criteria including patient-centeredness and patient and/or stakeholder engagement. To support extension of this unique collaborative model to other funders, information from the reviewers

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 Value in Health

13. A Patient-Centered Approach to Comparative Effectiveness Research Focused on Older Adults: Lessons From the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. (PubMed)

A Patient-Centered Approach to Comparative Effectiveness Research Focused on Older Adults: Lessons From the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. The mission of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) is to fund the production of high-quality evidence that will enable patients and clinicians to make informed, personalized healthcare decisions. Since 2012, the PCORI has invested $177 million in patient-centered comparative effectiveness research (CER) that specifically

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2018 Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

14. The value of comparative effectiveness research: projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007)

The value of comparative effectiveness research: projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007) The value of comparative effectiveness research: projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007) The value of comparative effectiveness research: projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007) Wong WB, Ramsey SD, Barlow WE, Garrison LP, Veenstra DL Record Status This is a critical abstract of an economic evaluation that meets the criteria (...) DL. The value of comparative effectiveness research: projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007) Contemporary Clinical Trials 2012; 33(6): 1117-1123 PubMedID DOI Original Paper URL Indexing Status Subject indexing assigned by NLM MeSH Antineoplastic Agents /administration & Breast Neoplasms /drug therapy /genetics; Comparative Effectiveness Research /economics /organization & Cost-Benefit Analysis; Decision Support Techniques; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Neoplasm

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2012 NHS Economic Evaluation Database.

15. [Comparative effectiveness research of computer-assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty]

[Comparative effectiveness research of computer-assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty] [Comparative effectiveness research of computer-assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty] [Comparative effectiveness research of computer-assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty] Oh KJ, Jang EJ, Kim YJ, Park JY, Shim JI, Kim SH , Na YG, Nam DC, Moon YW, Park HW, Seon JK, Song SJ, Shin YS, Yang JH, Lee KJ, Lee SH, Lee YM, Lim HT, Jang KM, Jang BH, Jung HJ, Cho Y, Han SB Citation Oh KJ, Jang EJ, Kim YJ (...) , Park JY, Shim JI, Kim SH , Na YG, Nam DC, Moon YW, Park HW, Seon JK, Song SJ, Shin YS, Yang JH, Lee KJ, Lee SH, Lee YM, Lim HT, Jang KM, Jang BH, Jung HJ, Cho Y, Han SB. [Comparative effectiveness research of computer-assisted navigation in knee arthroplasty] Seoul: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA). NECA-C-13-013. 2013 Authors' conclusions There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of revision rate based on the meta-analysis results

2013 Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database.

16. Preference option randomized design (PORD) for comparative effectiveness research: Statistical power for testing comparative effect, preference effect, selection effect, intent-to-treat effect, and overall effect. (PubMed)

Preference option randomized design (PORD) for comparative effectiveness research: Statistical power for testing comparative effect, preference effect, selection effect, intent-to-treat effect, and overall effect. Comparative effectiveness research trials in real-world settings may require participants to choose between preferred intervention options. A randomized clinical trial with parallel experimental and control arms is straightforward and regarded as a gold standard design, but by design (...) it forces and anticipates the participants to comply with a randomly assigned intervention regardless of their preference. Therefore, the randomized clinical trial may impose impractical limitations when planning comparative effectiveness research trials. To accommodate participants' preference if they are expressed, and to maintain randomization, we propose an alternative design that allows participants' preference after randomization, which we call a "preference option randomized design (PORD

2017 Statistical methods in medical research

17. A Bayesian model that jointly considers comparative effectiveness research and patients' preferences may help inform GRADE recommendations: An application to rheumatoid arthritis treatment recommendations. (PubMed)

A Bayesian model that jointly considers comparative effectiveness research and patients' preferences may help inform GRADE recommendations: An application to rheumatoid arthritis treatment recommendations. The objective of the study was to estimate the preferred treatment for early rheumatoid arthritis using a novel Bayesian approach that jointly considers patients' preferences and comparative effectiveness research.We estimated the preferred treatment using patients' preferences measured

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

18. PROPENSITY SCORE-BASED METHODS IN COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH ON CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE. (PubMed)

PROPENSITY SCORE-BASED METHODS IN COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH ON CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE. This review examines the conduct and reporting of observational studies using propensity score-based methods to compare coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or medical therapy for patients with coronary artery disease. A systematic selection process identified 48 studies: 20 addressing CABG versus PCI; 21 addressing bare-metal stents versus drug-eluting

2017 American Journal of Epidemiology

19. Comparative effectiveness research methodology using secondary data: A starting user's guide. (PubMed)

Comparative effectiveness research methodology using secondary data: A starting user's guide. The use of secondary data, such as claims or administrative data, in comparative effectiveness research has grown tremendously in recent years.We believe that the current review can help investigators relying on secondary data to (1) gain insight into both the methodologies and statistical methods, (2) better understand the necessity of a rigorous planning before initiating a comparative effectiveness (...) investigation, and (3) optimize the quality of their investigations.Specifically, we review concepts of adjusted analyses and confounders, methods of propensity score analyses, and instrumental variable analyses, risk prediction models (logistic and time-to-event), decision-curve analysis, as well as the interpretation of the P value and hypothesis testing.Overall, we hope that the current review article can help research investigators relying on secondary data to perform comparative effectiveness research

2017 Urologic oncology

20. Practice of Comparative Effectiveness Research to Identify Treatment Characteristics of Similar Chinese Patent Medicine for Angina Pectoris. (PubMed)

Practice of Comparative Effectiveness Research to Identify Treatment Characteristics of Similar Chinese Patent Medicine for Angina Pectoris. Individualized application of TCM is not easy and may lead to undesirable results, such as poor effect or even adverse reactions. This trial aims to compare two common Chinese patent medicines with similar effects.Four hospitals carried out the test at the same time in Tianjin city of China.144 patients were involved in this study; all patients must meet

Full Text available with Trip Pro

2017 Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (eCAM)

To help you find the content you need quickly, you can filter your results via the categories on the right-hand side >>>>