The ARRA investment in CER: a description of the midstream evaluation and how the funds were allocated and CER priorities addressed
- PMID: 25494564
- DOI: 10.2217/cer.14.55
The ARRA investment in CER: a description of the midstream evaluation and how the funds were allocated and CER priorities addressed
Abstract
Aim: To describe the evaluation design of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 comparative effectiveness research (CER) investment, how funds were allocated and how CER priorities were addressed.
Materials & methods: Primary and secondary data included information from redacted project proposals, an investigator survey and federal project officers, investigators and expert panel discussions.
Results: More than 420 projects (US$1.1 billion) were awarded. Those generating new or synthesizing existing CER made up the plurality (194, or US$524 million). Data infrastructure projects were the second-largest area (28%, US$302 million). More than three-fourths addressed at least one priority population, condition category or intervention category.
Conclusion: These investments expanded the nation's CER activities and its future capacity to conduct CER.
Keywords: comparative effectiveness research; data infrastructure; dissemination and translation; evaluation; human and scientific capital; priority conditions; priority interventions; priority populations.
Similar articles
-
Lessons from comparative effectiveness research methods development projects funded under the Recovery Act.J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Nov;3(6):601-7. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.64. J Comp Eff Res. 2014. PMID: 25494566
-
Assessing the long-term impact of public investments in comparative effectiveness research: conceptual framework and lessons learned.J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Nov;3(6):657-66. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.60. J Comp Eff Res. 2014. PMID: 25494572
-
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act investments in data infrastructure.J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Nov;3(6):591-600. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.56. J Comp Eff Res. 2014. PMID: 25494565
-
Leveraging observational registries to inform comparative effectiveness research.Am Heart J. 2010 Jul;160(1):8-15. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2010.04.012. Am Heart J. 2010. PMID: 20598966 Review.
-
Role of comparative effectiveness research in cancer funding decisions in Ontario, Canada.J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec 1;30(34):4262-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.1958. Epub 2012 Oct 15. J Clin Oncol. 2012. PMID: 23071242 Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources