‘Marginal Medicine’: Targeting Comparative Effectiveness Research To Reduce Waste
- 1 January 2009
- journal article
- Published by Health Affairs (Project Hope) in Health Affairs
- Vol. 28 (Supplement) , w710-w718
- https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.28.4.w710
Abstract
Many policymakers believe that comparative effectiveness research will reduce “waste” in the U.S. health care system by providing guidance on what health care options work best for different patients. How such research will produce findings that identify waste has not been clearly elucidated. This paper presents a conceptual framework for different evidentiary categories of what we call “marginal medicine.” This framework could help clinicians, researchers, and policymakers align the results of comparative effectiveness research with efforts to identify opportunities to improve the value of health care services.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- How Can Cost-Effectiveness Information Help Control Unsustainable Growth in U.S. Health Care Spending?Annals of Internal Medicine, 2009
- Clinical Equivalence of Generic and Brand-Name Drugs Used in Cardiovascular DiseaseJAMA, 2008
- Chelation Therapy Trials HaltedJAMA, 2008
- A Menu without PricesAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2008
- Who Really Pays for Health Care?Published by American Medical Association (AMA) ,2008
- Update on the Methods of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Estimating Certainty and Magnitude of Net BenefitAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2007
- Why Well-Insured Patients Should Demand Value-Based Insurance BenefitsPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,2007
- The Price Tag on Progress — Chemotherapy for Colorectal CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Comparison of four strategies for diagnosing deep vein thrombosis: a cost-effectiveness analysisThe American Journal of Medicine, 2001
- A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE)The Lancet, 1996