Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in developing a translation table framework for comparative effectiveness research

Richard E. Gliklich, Michelle B. Leavy, Priscilla Velentgas, Nancy A. Dreyer, Sean R. Tunis, Penny Mohr, Donna A. Messner, Rachael M. Moloney, Swapna U. Karkare, Robert W. Dubois, Jennifer S. Graff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This project used a stakeholder-driven process to understand the factors that drive the selection of study designs for comparative effectiveness research (CER). The project assembled a diverse stakeholder committee to explore the basis of a translation framework and gathered input through surveys, interviews and an in-person meeting. Stakeholders recommended different study designs for the CER topic areas and identified different outcomes as the most important outcomes to study in each area. During the discussions, stakeholders described a variety of factors that influenced their study design recommendations. The stakeholder activities resulted in the identification of several key themes, including the need to have a highly specific detailed research question before discussing appropriate designs and the need to use multiple studies, potentially of different designs, to address the CER topic areas. The insights and themes from this project may inform efforts to develop a translation table.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)281-292
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Volume1
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2012
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • comparative effectiveness research
  • decision-makers
  • Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
  • patient-centered outcomes research
  • Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  • research methods
  • stakeholders
  • translation table

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in developing a translation table framework for comparative effectiveness research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this