Insights from a conference on implementing comparative effectiveness research through shared decision-making.

Area of Science:

• Health Services Research
• Clinical Decision-Making
• Evidence-Based Practice

Background:

• Shared Decision-Making (SDM) facilitates patient-clinician discussions on health choices, balancing evidence with patient preferences.
• Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) rigorously compares intervention benefits and risks in real-world settings, focusing on patient-centered outcomes.
• Integrating CER findings into clinical practice faces significant implementation challenges.

Purpose of the Study:

• To foster a research network focused on implementing Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) through Shared Decision-Making (SDM).
• To discuss conceptual links, practical challenges, and strategies for integrating CER and SDM in clinical settings.
• To identify avenues for disseminating research on the implementation of CER through SDM.

Main Methods:

• A conference was convened in March 2012 at Washington University in St. Louis.
• Attendees discussed conceptual similarities and differences between CER and SDM.
• Key challenges and potential solutions for implementing CER and SDM were explored, including strategies for unique populations.

Main Results:

• CER and SDM are complementary processes emphasizing clinical evidence application to real-world patient care.
• SDM offers a platform for clinicians to discuss CER findings and manage evidence uncertainty with patients.
• The meeting identified critical implementation challenges and suggested future research directions.

Conclusions:

• Collaboration is essential for developing, conducting, and disseminating research on CER implementation via SDM.
• Addressing challenges in implementing CER and SDM is crucial for routine clinical practice integration.
• Further research is needed to bridge the gap between CER findings and their application through SDM in patient care.