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 journalArticlepeer-review

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

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Medicine(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative effectiveness research in mental health: An advocate's perspective'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this