Using data from comparative effectiveness studies to inform cost-effectiveness analyses or other economic evaluations would strengthen ethical policy making.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(7):651-655. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.7.pfor1-1507.
The objective is to compare the costs of providing the same level of quality. When resource-use and quality measures are juxtaposed, the resources used to provide the same level of quality can be compared.
Eitan Neidich, Alon B. Neidich, David A. Axelrod, MD, and John P. Roberts, MD
Geographic disparities in availability of organs for transplant have spawned for-profit companies that help patients get on waitlists in more than one region and arrange travel for them if an organ becomes available.
Although not everything on the Choosing Wisely lists is likely to reduce low-value care, it is a good starting point for a conversation about curtailing low-value interventions.
The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine provides a scale for stratifying evidence from strongest to weakest on the basis of susceptibility to bias and the quality of study design.
Bruce C. Vladeck, PhD, Sander Florman, MD, and Jonathan Cooper, JD
The United Network for Organ Sharing’s geographic allocation system is outdated and inequitable, particularly in light of improved ability to transport organs. Allocation should be based on common medical criteria, not accidents of geography.
Daphne C. Ferrer, MD and Peter M. Yellowlees, MBBS, MD
Telepsychiatry extends access to psychiatric treatment to those who might not otherwise get it, but licensure problems and the risk of boundary violations between patients and physicians need to be worked out.
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) may become an important factor in Medicare coverage decisions, and the new health care law may make it more easily available to the public to help in medical decision making.