Comparative Effectiveness Topics from a Large, Integrated Delivery System

Danforth et al. (2013) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

comparative effectiveness research

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

North America - USA

Why was it conducted at all?

Comparative effectiveness research has been proposed as a way to address the health care questions that are most relevant to patients, clinicians, and policymakers. Comparative effectiveness research, in contrast, compares different strategies for preventing, diagnosing, treating, or managing a clinical condition in real-world settings with respect to their effectiveness, benefits, or harms. This type of research further seek to determine what works best for whom, recognizing potential treatment response heterogeneity among population. For comparative effectiveness research to reach its potential in improving and transforming health care, efforts will need to focus on the questions of greatest relevance to patients, clinicians, administrators, and policymakers. Integrated health care delivery organizations are well situated to identify important research questions whose answers could improve the everyday delivery of health care.

What was the objective?

to identify high-priority comparative effectiveness questions directly relevant to care delivery

What was the outcome?

a list of 95 research questions

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?


How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: survey 1: clinical and operational leaders asked to nominate up to 5 comparative effectiveness research questions within their areas of expertise. Step 2: data processing: questions cleaned, reviewed, resulting in 288 questions. Step 3: survey 2: 288 questions split into 18 groups of related topics, 18 surveys developed that included range of 9 to 23 nominated research questions each, individuals were assigned to receive a particular survey based on their specialty area or whether they had nominated a question on that survey, survey asked participants to choose the 5 research questions that they believed should have the highest priority for comparative effectiveness research in their set of grouped topics

Which stakeholders took part?

Clinical and operational leaders. 181 participants in survey 1.

How were stakeholders recruited?

Survey 1: The survey link was sent to the KP Survey of Critical Topics in Comparative Effectiveness to 792 clinical and operational leaders. Survey recipients were identified in multiple ways, including using existing distribution lists of clinical leaders in and across KP Regions for specific clinical specialties (eg, breast cancer, urology, cardiovascular disease, behavioral health), as well as lists of those involved in developing national KP clinical practice guidelines, working in quality improvement, or working in technology and products. Survey 2: The respondent list was updated with input from national and regional KP leadership, including adding researchers with relevant expertise to the survey recipients.

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.