Skip to main content
Effective Health Care Program

Symposium on Methods for Developing and Analyzing Clinically Rich Data for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research - Part III

Executive Summary

In June 2011, the Effective Health Care Program, through the DEcIDE Network, sponsored its third symposium on research methods for clinical and comparative effectiveness studies. The symposium examined new and emerging methods for comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research (CER/PCOR) that either use clinically rich data sources or enrich existing data sources with supplemental data. Presenters described novel approaches to addressing the overall meeting theme or focused on the application of an existing method to a particular problem using empirical data or simulation studies. Applications included a wide range of CER/PCOR questions, including the evaluation of delivery systems, medical products, procedures and interventions.

Presenters at the symposium submitted manuscripts for independent peer review and publication in a journal supplement of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety. Below are links to each article. A printed copy of the supplement is available free of charge through the AHRQ Publications Clearinghouse. To order the printed supplement call toll free 800-358-9295 or send an email to AHRQpubs@ahrq.hhs.gov. Refer to AHRQ publication number is OM12-0043, when ordering.

Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, Volume 21, Supplement 2, June 2012.

Methods for Developing and Analyzing Clinically Rich Data for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research: An Overview.
S. Schneeweiss, J. D. Seeger and S. R. Smith

When to Randomize, or ‘Evidence-Based Medicine Needs Medicine-Based Evidence.
J. Concato

Analyzing Partially Missing Confounder Information in Comparative Effectiveness and Safety Research of Therapeutics.
S. Toh, L. A. García Rodríguez and M. A. Hernán

Identification of Metastatic Cancer in Claims Data.
B. L. Nordstrom, J. L. Whyte, M. Stolar, C. Mercaldi and J. D. Kallich

Linkage of Routinely Collected Oncology Clinical Data with Health Insurance Claims Data—an Example with Aromatase Inhibitors, Tamoxifen, and All-Cause Mortality.
D. D. Dore, C. Liang, N. Ziyadeh, H. Norman, M. Bayliss and J. D. Seeger

Merging of the National Cancer Institute–Funded Cooperative Oncology Group Data with an Administrative Data Source to Develop a More Effective Platform for Clinical Trial Analysis and Comparative Effectiveness Research: A Report from the Children’s Oncology Group.
R. Aplenc, B. T. Fisher, Y. S. Huang, Y. Li, T. A. Alonzo, R. B. Gerbing, M. Hall, D. Bertoch, R. Keren, A. E. Seif, L. Sung, P. C. Adamson and A. Gamis

Incorporating Initial Treatments Improves Performance of a Mortality Prediction Model for Patients with Sepsis.
T. Lagu, M. B. Rothberg, B. H. Nathanson, J. S. Steingrub and P. K. Lindenauer

Evaluation of Total Hip Arthroplasty Devices Using a Total Joint Replacement Registry.
E. W. Paxton, C. F. Ake, M. C. S. Inacio, M. Khatod, D. Marinac-Dabic and A. Sedrakyan

Prior Event Rate Ratio Adjustment: Numerical Studies of a Statistical Method to Address Unrecognized Confounding in Observational Studies.
M.Yu, D. Xie, X. Wang, M. G. Weiner and R. L. Tannen

One-to-Many Propensity Score Matching in Cohort Studies.
J. A. Rassen, A. A. Shelat, J. Myers, R. J. Glynn, K. J. Rothman and S. Schneeweiss

Performance of Propensity Score Methods When Comparison Groups Originate from Different Data Sources.
B. G. Hammill, L. H. Curtis and S. Setoguchi

Confronting “Confounding by Health System Use” in Medicare Part D: Comparative Effectiveness of Propensity Score Approaches to Confounding Adjustment.
J. M. Polinski, S. Schneeweiss, R. J. Glynn, J. Lii and J. A. Rassen

Dynamic Marginal Structural Modeling to Evaluate the Comparative Effectiveness of More or Less Aggressive Treatment Intensification Strategies in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.
R. Neugebauer, B. Fireman, J. A. Roy, P. J. O’Connor and J. V. Selby

Simulation Study of Instrumental Variable Aproaches with an Application to a Study of the Antidiabetic Effect of Bezafibrate.
B. Cai, S. Hennessy, J. H. Flory, D. Sha, T. R. Ten Have and D. S. Small

Assessing the Applicability of Trial Evidence to a Target Sample in the Presence of Heterogeneity of Treatment Effect.
C. O. Weiss, J. B. Segal and R. Varadhan

Comparative Effectiveness Research Using Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison:
an Application to Treatment with Guanfacine Extended Release or Atomoxetine in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Oppositional Defiant Disorder

J. Signorovitch, M. H. Erder, J. Xie, V. Sikirica, M. Lu, P. S. Hodgkins and E. Q. Wu

Role of Disease Risk Scores in Comparative Effectiveness Research with Emerging Therapies.
R. J. Glynn, J. J. Gagne and S. Schneeweiss

Reweighted Mahalanobis Distance Matching for Cluster-Randomized Trials with Missing Data.
R. A. Greevy Jr., C. G. Grijalva, C. L. Roumie, C. Beck, A. M. Hung, H. J. Murff , X. Liu and M. R. Griffin