Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Clinical Trials01:16

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials are prospective experimental studies conducted on humans to determine the safety and efficacy of treatments, drugs, diet methods, and medical devices. Using statistics in clinical trials enables researchers to derive reasonable and accurate conclusions from the collected data, allowing them to make wise decisions in uncertain situations. In medical research, statistical methods are crucial for preventing errors and bias.
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Clinical Trials: Overview01:11

Clinical Trials: Overview

Clinical development focuses on how the drug will interact with the human body and encompasses four key phases of clinical trials, each serving a specific purpose in assessing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs. These phases overlap and build upon one another. Phase I involves a small group of healthy volunteers (typically 20-80 individuals) or, in cases where significant toxicity is expected, patients with the targeted disease, such as cancer or AIDS. The volunteers are tested for...
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
Bioequivalence: Overview01:16

Bioequivalence: Overview

Pharmaceutical equivalents, by definition, are drug products with the same active ingredient in the same quantities, encapsulated in identical dosage forms, and intended for the same administration routes. These pharmaceutical equivalents are deemed bioequivalent if the bioavailability of the active entity in the drug preparations is similar. Moreover, pharmaceutical equivalents demonstrating bioequivalence are also regarded as therapeutically equivalent. This means that when used as directed,...
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications01:09

Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications

The concept of therapeutic equivalence (TE) in drugs with multiple indications is complex. A generic drug may be therapeutically equivalent to a brand-name product for one specific indication, but this doesn't necessarily mean it's equivalent for all other indications. Evidence of TE in one patient group and bioequivalence shown in healthy volunteers can support—but not confirm—TE for other indications. However, definitive proof requires individual clinical studies for each indication due to...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Assessing the value of healthcare innovations: a proposal for an integrated health technology assessment-responsible innovation in health approach in the "new normal".

International journal of technology assessment in health care·2022
Same author

The qualitative experience of telehealth access and clinical encounters in Australian healthcare during COVID-19: implications for policy.

Health research policy and systems·2022
Same author

'All the stars were aligned'? The origins of England's National Institute for Health Research.

Health research policy and systems·2019
Same author

A novel approach to sharing all available information from funded health research: the NIHR Journals Library.

Health research policy and systems·2018
Same author

The NIHR at 10: transforming clinical research .

Clinical medicine (London, England)·2016
Same author

Publicly funded practice-oriented clinical trials: of importance for healthcare payers.

Journal of comparative effectiveness research·2016

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 25, 2026

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

Translating comparative effectiveness research into clinical practice: the UK experience.

Tom Walley1

  • 1HTA Programme, National Institute for Health Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. twalley@liv.ac.uk

Drugs
|January 25, 2012
PubMed
Summary

Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) offers significant healthcare improvement potential in the US, drawing lessons from UK experience. Key areas for development include evidence application, recommendation implementation, topic identification, and stakeholder fairness for better health outcomes.

More Related Videos

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
06:16

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting

Published on: June 6, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 25, 2026

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
06:16

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting

Published on: June 6, 2020

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Health Economics
  • Policy Analysis

Background:

  • Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) has unrealized potential in the US healthcare system.
  • The UK possesses more extensive experience in implementing CER.
  • US healthcare effectiveness can be improved by leveraging international CER best practices.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To summarize key aspects of the UK's experience with CER.
  • To identify actionable insights and potential pitfalls for the US in adopting CER.
  • To explore challenges and opportunities in CER implementation, including scientific quality and stakeholder engagement.

Main Methods:

  • Review and synthesis of UK CER implementation strategies.
  • Analysis of factors influencing CER recommendation authority and timeliness.
  • Examination of methods for identifying suitable CER topics and ensuring stakeholder fairness.

Main Results:

  • UK experience highlights the need to move beyond evidence to make authoritative recommendations.
  • Successful CER implementation requires clear strategies for disseminating and acting on recommendations.
  • Developing the scientific rigor of CER, including public expectations and health economics, is crucial.

Conclusions:

  • The US must develop its own CER approach, learning from but not directly copying other countries' experiences.
  • Integrating health economics, considering both benefits and costs, is essential for CER's success.
  • Transparency, fairness to stakeholders, and robust scientific quality are vital for maximizing CER's impact on healthcare effectiveness.