Comparative effectiveness

The abolition of the Office of Technology Assessment and attacks on the Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research, resulting in a large decrease in funding, are referred to by several commentators. [...] Of the remaining funds, $400 million each will go to NIH and the Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services. [...] When decisions are made on imperfect information, processes need to be in place to reevaluate those decisions as new information becomes available, and decision makers need to consider the costs and benefits of changing those policies once adopted.” (22) “It is essential to the public good and the advancement of medical practice and well being of patients to maintain a review process that consider [...] The review should include both internal evaluations and external commentaries.” (8) “The panel should develop recommendations for educating both the general public and the medical profession and for promoting discussion on the use of comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness information to meet the needs of the individual and to help ensure the equitable distribution of finite health care resour [...] Some of the work proposed for CE in the US could extend the scope of data base use in assessment in terms of broader linkages and more consistent, longer term follow up of health technologies after their introduction.