The Outcomes of Cancer Outcomes Research: focusing on the National Cancer Institute's quality-of-care initiative.

Outcomes Research Branch, Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7344, USA.
Medical Care (Impact Factor: 2.94). 07/2002; 40(6 Suppl):III3-10.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess the impact of outcomes research, the Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research has proposed a four-level typology that successively distinguishes between research that (1) adds to the knowledge base only, (2) affects practice policies, (3) influences the delivery of care, and (4) leads to changes in health outcomes. The agency has concluded that outcomes research to date has made substantial contributions at level 1, but has had little impact at levels 2 to 4.
To describe the National Cancer Institute's emerging agenda in cancer outcomes research, focusing on how it has been shaped early on to support the institute's quality of care initiative and noting whether each new project represents outcomes research at level 1, 2, 3, or 4.
Cancer outcomes research describes, interprets, and predicts the impact of various influences, especially (but not exclusively) interventions on endpoints that matter to decision makers. The institute's projects to improve the scientific quality of final endpoint measures, strengthen the methodologic and empirical basis for quality of care analysis, and enhance the application of health-related quality-of-life measures in clinical trials represent level 1 applications of outcomes research. Collaborative projects with federal agencies to translate evidence into practice and a new public and private effort to identify core measures of cancer quality represent level 2 and level 3 outcomes research.
The stage has been set for carrying out a balanced portfolio of level 1 to 3 outcomes research projects in cancer, with the ultimate (level 4) aim of improving cancer-related health outcomes.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of the study was to develop organization-based core performance measures (CPMs) for breast cancer patients treated in hospitals that participated in cancer quality improvement programmes in Taiwan. CPMs were developed in three stages that included a preparation, a consensus building stage, and two stages of stakeholder feedback. Three criteria and seven subcriteria were applied in the development process. Indicators listed in a Delphi questionnaire were based on a literature search, indicators developed by relevant institutions and discussion by authors. Each indicator needed to meet inclusion criteria as a final indicator. Evidence-based guidelines, expert opinions from panel group, 27 hospitals and empirical data were all applied to develop and revise the core measures. Fifteen out of 28 indicators were selected and modified after the three stages. There were two pre-treatment indicators for screening and diagnosis, nine treatment-related indicators, and four monitoring-related indicators. Six indicators were supported by evidence level I, and four indicators by level II evidence. The CPMs for breast cancer can be developed systematically and be applied for internal quality improvement and external surveillance. Our experience can be extended to other cancer sites and adapted to link with pay for performance or certification program in cancer care.
    European Journal of Cancer Care 12/2007; 17(1):5 - 18. · 1.31 Impact Factor
  • Drug Development Research 07/2006; 67(3):181 - 182. · 0.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient registries provide key data for clinical trials, patient safety and disease progression research. Current standards are insufficient to guide consistent authoring and reuse of registry questions. An outcome measure and its accompanying measurable indicators provide the means for the collection of data over a continuum of care. These data can be translated into comparison research, supporting the development of evidence-based knowledge. Lack of standardized approach to question/answer authoring and identification of outcome measure indicators have been an obstacle to interoperability of registry data with electronic medical and personal health records.
    Nursing informatics ... : proceedings of the ... International Congress on Nursing Informatics. 01/2012; 2012:391.