Evaluating Medical Effectiveness for the California Health Benefits Review Program
Identifieur interne : 003C77 ( Pmc/Checkpoint ); précédent : 003C76; suivant : 003C78Evaluating Medical Effectiveness for the California Health Benefits Review Program
Auteurs : Harold S. Luft ; Karen M. Rappaport ; Edward H. Yelin ; Wade M. AubrySource :
- Health Services Research [ 0017-9124 ] ; 2006.
Abstract
An important aspect of the mandate assessments requested by the California legislature is a review of the scientific and medical literature on the medical effectiveness of the proposed health insurance benefit mandate. Although such a review bears many similarities to effectiveness reviews that might be undertaken for publication as research studies, several important differences arise from the requirements of the California legislation.
Our reviews are intended to assist the legislators in deciding whether to support a specific mandate to modify health insurance benefits in a particular way. Thus, our assessments focus on how the scientific literature bears on the proposed mandate, which may involve a complicated chain of potential effects leading from altered coverage to ultimate impact on health. Evidence may be available for only some of the links in the chain. Furthermore, not all the evidence may be directly applicable to the diverse population of California or the subpopulation affected by the mandate.
The mandate reviews, including the medical effectiveness analyses, may be used in a potentially contentious decision making setting. The legislative calendar requires that they need to be timely, yet they must be as valid, credible, and based on the best information available as possible. The focus on applicability also implies the need for informed, technical decisions concerning the relevance of the articles for the report, and these decisions need to be made as transparent as possible. These goals and constraints yield an approach that differs somewhat from an investigator-initiated review of the literature.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00517.x
PubMed: 16704669
PubMed Central: 1713216
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
PMC:1713216Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Evaluating Medical Effectiveness for the California Health Benefits Review Program</title>
<author><name sortKey="Luft, Harold S" sort="Luft, Harold S" uniqKey="Luft H" first="Harold S" last="Luft">Harold S. Luft</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Rappaport, Karen M" sort="Rappaport, Karen M" uniqKey="Rappaport K" first="Karen M" last="Rappaport">Karen M. Rappaport</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Yelin, Edward H" sort="Yelin, Edward H" uniqKey="Yelin E" first="Edward H" last="Yelin">Edward H. Yelin</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Aubry, Wade M" sort="Aubry, Wade M" uniqKey="Aubry W" first="Wade M" last="Aubry">Wade M. Aubry</name>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno>
<idno type="pmid">16704669</idno>
<idno type="pmc">1713216</idno>
<idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1713216</idno>
<idno type="RBID">PMC:1713216</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00517.x</idno>
<date when="2006">2006</date>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">002E40</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">002E40</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Curation">002E39</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Curation">002E39</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Checkpoint">003C77</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Checkpoint">003C77</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Evaluating Medical Effectiveness for the California Health Benefits Review Program</title>
<author><name sortKey="Luft, Harold S" sort="Luft, Harold S" uniqKey="Luft H" first="Harold S" last="Luft">Harold S. Luft</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Rappaport, Karen M" sort="Rappaport, Karen M" uniqKey="Rappaport K" first="Karen M" last="Rappaport">Karen M. Rappaport</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Yelin, Edward H" sort="Yelin, Edward H" uniqKey="Yelin E" first="Edward H" last="Yelin">Edward H. Yelin</name>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Aubry, Wade M" sort="Aubry, Wade M" uniqKey="Aubry W" first="Wade M" last="Aubry">Wade M. Aubry</name>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j">Health Services Research</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0017-9124</idno>
<imprint><date when="2006">2006</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass></textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p>An important aspect of the mandate assessments requested by the California legislature is a review of the scientific and medical literature on the medical effectiveness of the proposed health insurance benefit mandate. Although such a review bears many similarities to effectiveness reviews that might be undertaken for publication as research studies, several important differences arise from the requirements of the California legislation.</p>
<p>Our reviews are intended to assist the legislators in deciding whether to support a specific mandate to modify health insurance benefits in a particular way. Thus, our assessments focus on how the scientific literature bears on the proposed mandate, which may involve a complicated chain of potential effects leading from altered coverage to ultimate impact on health. Evidence may be available for only some of the links in the chain. Furthermore, not all the evidence may be directly applicable to the diverse population of California or the subpopulation affected by the mandate.</p>
<p>The mandate reviews, including the medical effectiveness analyses, may be used in a potentially contentious decision making setting. The legislative calendar requires that they need to be timely, yet they must be as valid, credible, and based on the best information available as possible. The focus on applicability also implies the need for informed, technical decisions concerning the relevance of the articles for the report, and these decisions need to be made as transparent as possible. These goals and constraints yield an approach that differs somewhat from an investigator-initiated review of the literature.</p>
</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-comment>The publisher of this article does not allow downloading of the full text in XML form.</pmc-comment>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">Health Serv Res</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">hesr</journal-id>
<journal-title>Health Services Research</journal-title>
<issn pub-type="ppub">0017-9124</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Blackwell Science Inc</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">16704669</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="pmc">1713216</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00517.x</article-id>
<article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Original Articles</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group><article-title>Evaluating Medical Effectiveness for the California Health Benefits Review Program</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Luft</surname>
<given-names>Harold S</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Rappaport</surname>
<given-names>Karen M</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Yelin</surname>
<given-names>Edward H</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Aubry</surname>
<given-names>Wade M</given-names>
</name>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<author-notes><corresp id="cor1">Address correspondence to Harold S. Luft, Ph.D., Institute for Health Policy Studies, 3333 California Street, Suite 265, San Francisco, CA. Karen M. Rappaport, M.D., Ph.D., Edward H. Yelin, Ph.D., and Wade M. Aubry, M.D., are with the Institute for Health Policy Studies, San Francisco, CA.</corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>6</month>
<year>2006</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>41</volume>
<issue>3 Pt 2</issue>
<fpage>1007</fpage>
<lpage>1026</lpage>
<copyright-statement>© 2006 Health Research and Educational Trust</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2006</copyright-year>
<abstract><p>An important aspect of the mandate assessments requested by the California legislature is a review of the scientific and medical literature on the medical effectiveness of the proposed health insurance benefit mandate. Although such a review bears many similarities to effectiveness reviews that might be undertaken for publication as research studies, several important differences arise from the requirements of the California legislation.</p>
<p>Our reviews are intended to assist the legislators in deciding whether to support a specific mandate to modify health insurance benefits in a particular way. Thus, our assessments focus on how the scientific literature bears on the proposed mandate, which may involve a complicated chain of potential effects leading from altered coverage to ultimate impact on health. Evidence may be available for only some of the links in the chain. Furthermore, not all the evidence may be directly applicable to the diverse population of California or the subpopulation affected by the mandate.</p>
<p>The mandate reviews, including the medical effectiveness analyses, may be used in a potentially contentious decision making setting. The legislative calendar requires that they need to be timely, yet they must be as valid, credible, and based on the best information available as possible. The focus on applicability also implies the need for informed, technical decisions concerning the relevance of the articles for the report, and these decisions need to be made as transparent as possible. These goals and constraints yield an approach that differs somewhat from an investigator-initiated review of the literature.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group><kwd>California Health Benefits Review Program</kwd>
<kwd>medical effectiveness</kwd>
<kwd>efficacy</kwd>
<kwd>mandate review</kwd>
<kwd>randomized controlled trials</kwd>
<kwd>meta-analyses</kwd>
<kwd>systematic reviews</kwd>
<kwd>observational studies</kwd>
<kwd>case-control studies</kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
</pmc>
<affiliations><list></list>
<tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Aubry, Wade M" sort="Aubry, Wade M" uniqKey="Aubry W" first="Wade M" last="Aubry">Wade M. Aubry</name>
<name sortKey="Luft, Harold S" sort="Luft, Harold S" uniqKey="Luft H" first="Harold S" last="Luft">Harold S. Luft</name>
<name sortKey="Rappaport, Karen M" sort="Rappaport, Karen M" uniqKey="Rappaport K" first="Karen M" last="Rappaport">Karen M. Rappaport</name>
<name sortKey="Yelin, Edward H" sort="Yelin, Edward H" uniqKey="Yelin E" first="Edward H" last="Yelin">Edward H. Yelin</name>
</noCountry>
</tree>
</affiliations>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Sante/explor/LymphedemaV1/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 003C77 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 003C77 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Sante |area= LymphedemaV1 |flux= Pmc |étape= Checkpoint |type= RBID |clé= PMC:1713216 |texte= Evaluating Medical Effectiveness for the California Health Benefits Review Program }}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:16704669" \ | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd \ | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a LymphedemaV1
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. | ![]() |