Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

1 Introduction
Pages 21-28

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 21...
... In the midst of one of the nation's most serious economic crises, and in anticipation of major national health care reform, the 111th Congress acted to significantly expand public spending, particularly on the nation's capacity to conduct comparative effectiveness research (CER)
From page 22...
... study scope Pursuant to the congressional mandate, the IOM committee established to carry out the study was charged with obtaining extensive stakeholder input for the formulation of national priorities for the Secretary's investment of the ARRA funds for CER. The Governing Board Executive Committee of the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academies, authorized the study emphasizing stakeholder input (Box 1-1)
From page 23...
... Committee Formation and Procedures The legislation was signed February 17, 2009, and the IOM appointed most of the Committee on Comparative Effectiveness Research Prioritization on February 28, 2009, with a final few members in mid-March. The 23-member committee included experts in behavioral health, bioethics, biostatistics, child health, clinical trials, consumer and patient perspectives, disabilities, drug development, geriatrics, health care delivery, health care policy, health economics, health insurance, internal medicine, prevention, public health, racial and ethnic disparities, surgery, systematic review methods, and women's health.
From page 24...
... The questionnaire was active on the project's website starting that same day and a broadcast announcement was emailed on March 9 to approximately 20,000 recipients, including everyone on the IOM listservs and targeted organizations involved in health care announcing all three opportunities for public input. In particular, public, consumer, and patient input was solicited by direct contact with major consumer and patient advocacy organizations (e.g., AARP, Consumers Union, National Health Council, National Minority Quality Forum)
From page 25...
... Much of the CER committee's efforts have been guided by the findings and recommendations of the IOM Committee on Reviewing Evidence to Identify Highly Effective Clinical Services found in Knowing What Works in Health Care (IOM, 2008)
From page 26...
... The distribution of the public nominations is presented with their clinical characteristics pertinent to the portfolio distribution. • Chapter 4 -- The Criteria and Process for Setting Priorities describes priority selection criteria used in past IOM committee initiatives and presents the committee's recommendations.
From page 27...
... 2007b. Learning what works best: The nation's need for evidence on comparative effectiveness in health care.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.