Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 63, Issue 5 , Pages 471-473 , May 2010

AHRQ Series Editorial: Public involvement improves methods development in comparative effectiveness reviews

,Accepted 30 November 2009.

References 

  1. Slutsky J, Atkins D, Chang S, Collins Sharp BA. AHRQ Series Paper 1: Comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:481–483(In this issue)
  2. Hernandez A, Walker E, Ioannidis JP, Kattan MW. Challenges in meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials for rare harmful cardiovascular events: the case of rosiglitazone. Am Heart J. 2008;156:23–30
  3. Seidenfeld J, Piper M, Bohlius J, Weingart O, Trelle S, Engert A, et al. Comparative effectiveness of epoetin and darbepoetin for managing anemia in patients undergoing cancer treatment. Comparative effectiveness review No. 3. (Prepared by Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center Evidence-based Practice Center under contract No. 290-02-0026.). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2006;Available at http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/ehc/products/4/33/EPO%20Final.pdf(accessed March 7, 2010)
  4. Chou R, Aronson N, Atkins D, Ismaila AS, Santaguida P, Smith DH, et al. AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:502–512(In this issue)
  5. Vandenbroucke J. Case reports in an evidence-based world. J R Soc Med. 1999;92(4):159–163
  6. Vandenbroucke J. Balancing benefits and harms in health care: observational data on harm should complement. BMJ. 2003;327:750
  7. Vandenbroucke J. Case reports of suspected adverse drug reactions: case reports were dismissed too quickly. BMJ. 2006;332:488
  8. Helfand M, Balshem H. AHRQ Series Paper 2: Principles for developing guidance: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:484–490(In this issue)
  9. Freemantle N, Blonde L, Bolinder B, Gerber RA, Hobbs FD, Martinez L, et al. Real-world trials to answer real-world questions. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(8):747–754
  10. Freemantle N, Strack T. Real-world effectiveness of new medicines should be evaluated by appropriately designed clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;[ePub ahead of press]
  11. Whitlock EP, Lopez SA, Chang S, Helfand M, Eder M, Floyd N. AHRQ Series Paper 3: Identifying, selecting, and refining topics for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:491–501(In this issue)
  12. IOM (Institute of Medicine) . Initial national priorities for comparative effectiveness research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2009;
  13. Owens DK, Lohr KN, Atkins D, Treadwell JR, Reston JT, Bass EB, et al. AHRQ Series Paper 5: Grading the strength of a body of evidence when comparing medical interventions-Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Effective Health-Care Program. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:513–523(In this issue)
  14. GRADE Working Group . Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490
  15. Lohr KN. Rating the strength of scientific evidence: relevance for quality improvement programs. Int J Qual Health Care. 2004;16(1):9–18
  16. Harris R, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM, et al. for the Methods Work Group, Third US Preventive Services Task Force Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(3 suppl):21–35
  17. Drummond M, Schwartz JS, Jönsson B, Luce BR, Neumann PJ, Siebert U, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24(3):244–258

PII: S0895-4356(10)00065-X

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.11.018

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 63, Issue 5 , Pages 471-473 , May 2010

Article Tools