PCORI-funded Project to Examine Methods for Comparing Results from Randomized Trials versus Observational Studies

September 13, 2013

The DCRI's Elizabeth DeLong, Daniel Mark, and Eric Peterson, helped construct a methodology grant which will receive over $1 million in funding over the next 3 years.

Several DCRI researchers are part of a team that was recently awarded funding for a methodology grant by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) to compare randomized trial results versus those from observational studies. The proposed project, which is titled “Integrating Causal Inference, Evidence Synthesis, and Research Prioritization Methods,” was one of 71 awards issued by PCORI with the goal of providing the best available evidence to help patients and their health care providers make more informed decisions.

Liz Delong, PhD, MA (feature)These awards are part of PCORI’s plan to create the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, which will conduct randomized comparative effectiveness studies using data from clinical practice in large, defined populations.

The project will receive more than $1 million over the next 3 years and will center on evaluation of the quality and degree of relevance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) versus observational studies (OBSs). The research team includes the DCRI’s Elizabeth DeLong, PhD, MA (pictured right); Daniel Mark, MD; and Eric Peterson, MD, MPH; and is led by John Wong, MD, from Tufts Medical Center.

“For this project, our focus is on improving methods for comparative effectiveness research by examining the differences in patient populations and results for randomized trials and observational studies,” said DeLong. “We will also work on developing and expanding ways to integrate OBS and RCT data and will seek to evaluate when gathering more information through additional research would be an efficient use of societal resources.”


Article originally published on the DCRI website