According to the Gooznews…

The committee advising the Health and Human Services department on how it should spend its portion of the $1.1 billion for comparative effectiveness research included in the stimulus package has listed cost of care as a major factor to consider when determining what research ought to get done. That recommendation rejects testimony from industry and some patient advocacy groups (mostly industry-funded), who specifically called for eliminating cost as a factor when considering which technologies to evaluate.

Here’s the first of HHS’ five proposed criteria:

1. Potential Impact (based on prevalence of condition, burden of disease, variability in outcomes, and costs of care)

Be sure to submit feedback prior to June 10, 2009. HHS Feedback Form

Today, the US Department of Health & Human Services – HHS released it’s draft definition of comparative effectiveness research.

Comparative effectiveness research is the conduct and synthesis of systematic research comparing different interventions and strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat and monitor health conditions. The purpose of this research is to inform patients, providers, and decision-makers, responding to their expressed needs, about which interventions are most effective for which patients under specific circumstances. To provide this information, comparative effectiveness research must assess a comprehensive array of health-related outcomes for diverse patient populations. Defined interventions compared may include medications, procedures, medical and assistive devices and technologies, behavioral change strategies, and delivery system interventions. This research necessitates the development, expansion, and use of a variety of data sources and methods to assess comparative effectiveness.

Read more about the comparative effectiveness research draft and be sure to submit feedback