Comparative effectiveness research in mental health: An advocate's perspective

David L. Shern, Kirsten K. Beronio, Chin Chin I Minniear, Sarah M. Steverman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research holds great promise for improving the care of people with mental health conditions and disorders related to substance abuse. But inappropriate application of such research can threaten the quality of that care. We examine the controversy surrounding a large real-world trial of schizophrenia treatments and conclude that the initial presentation of results led to overly simplistic policy suggestions that had the potential to harm patients. Patient advocacy groups helped illuminate these consequences and helped stimulate further discussion and analysis. Researchers must engage stakeholders, especially patients, in all aspects of comparative effectiveness research and translate the findings into sound mental health policy and practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1857-1862
Number of pages6
JournalHealth Affairs
Volume29
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Comparative Effectiveness Research
Mental Health
Patient Harm
Patient Advocacy
Quality of Health Care
Health Policy
Mental Disorders
Substance-Related Disorders
Schizophrenia
Research Personnel
Research
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Shern, D. L., Beronio, K. K., Minniear, C. C. I., & Steverman, S. M. (2010). Comparative effectiveness research in mental health: An advocate's perspective. Health Affairs, 29(10), 1857-1862. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0650

Comparative effectiveness research in mental health : An advocate's perspective. / Shern, David L.; Beronio, Kirsten K.; Minniear, Chin Chin I; Steverman, Sarah M.

In: Health Affairs, Vol. 29, No. 10, 10.2010, p. 1857-1862.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Shern, DL, Beronio, KK, Minniear, CCI & Steverman, SM 2010, 'Comparative effectiveness research in mental health: An advocate's perspective', Health Affairs, vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 1857-1862. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0650
Shern, David L. ; Beronio, Kirsten K. ; Minniear, Chin Chin I ; Steverman, Sarah M. / Comparative effectiveness research in mental health : An advocate's perspective. In: Health Affairs. 2010 ; Vol. 29, No. 10. pp. 1857-1862.
@article{99f7c18183de4173835fda014aefc907,
title = "Comparative effectiveness research in mental health: An advocate's perspective",
abstract = "Comparative effectiveness research holds great promise for improving the care of people with mental health conditions and disorders related to substance abuse. But inappropriate application of such research can threaten the quality of that care. We examine the controversy surrounding a large real-world trial of schizophrenia treatments and conclude that the initial presentation of results led to overly simplistic policy suggestions that had the potential to harm patients. Patient advocacy groups helped illuminate these consequences and helped stimulate further discussion and analysis. Researchers must engage stakeholders, especially patients, in all aspects of comparative effectiveness research and translate the findings into sound mental health policy and practice.",
author = "Shern, {David L.} and Beronio, {Kirsten K.} and Minniear, {Chin Chin I} and Steverman, {Sarah M.}",
year = "2010",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0650",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "1857--1862",
journal = "Health Affairs",
issn = "0278-2715",
publisher = "Project Hope",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative effectiveness research in mental health

T2 - An advocate's perspective

AU - Shern, David L.

AU - Beronio, Kirsten K.

AU - Minniear, Chin Chin I

AU - Steverman, Sarah M.

PY - 2010/10

Y1 - 2010/10

N2 - Comparative effectiveness research holds great promise for improving the care of people with mental health conditions and disorders related to substance abuse. But inappropriate application of such research can threaten the quality of that care. We examine the controversy surrounding a large real-world trial of schizophrenia treatments and conclude that the initial presentation of results led to overly simplistic policy suggestions that had the potential to harm patients. Patient advocacy groups helped illuminate these consequences and helped stimulate further discussion and analysis. Researchers must engage stakeholders, especially patients, in all aspects of comparative effectiveness research and translate the findings into sound mental health policy and practice.

AB - Comparative effectiveness research holds great promise for improving the care of people with mental health conditions and disorders related to substance abuse. But inappropriate application of such research can threaten the quality of that care. We examine the controversy surrounding a large real-world trial of schizophrenia treatments and conclude that the initial presentation of results led to overly simplistic policy suggestions that had the potential to harm patients. Patient advocacy groups helped illuminate these consequences and helped stimulate further discussion and analysis. Researchers must engage stakeholders, especially patients, in all aspects of comparative effectiveness research and translate the findings into sound mental health policy and practice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952116511&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952116511&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0650

DO - 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0650

M3 - Article

C2 - 20921486

AN - SCOPUS:79952116511

VL - 29

SP - 1857

EP - 1862

JO - Health Affairs

JF - Health Affairs

SN - 0278-2715

IS - 10

ER -