The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
June 2009 (Volume 87)
Quarterly Article
Kalipso Chalkidou
Sean Tunis
Ruth Lopert
Lise Rochaix
Peter T. Sawicki
Mona Nasser
Bertrand Xerri
Oct 30, 2024
Oct 23, 2024
Oct 4, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Context: The discussion about improving the efficiency, quality, and long-term sustainability of the U.S. health care system is increasingly focusing on the need to provide better evidence for decision making through comparative effectiveness research (CER). In recent years, several other countries have established agencies to evaluate health technologies and broader management strategies to inform health care policy decisions. This article reviews experiences from Britain, France, Australia, and Germany. Methods: This article draws on the experience of senior technical and administrative staff in setting up and running the CER entities studied. Besides reviewing the agencies’ websites, legal framework documents, and informal interviews with key stakeholders, this analysis was informed by a workshop bringing together U.S. and international experts. Findings: This article builds a matrix of features identified from the international models studied that offer insights into near-term decisions about the location, design, and function of a U.S.-based CER entity. While each country has developed a CER capacity unique to its health system, elements such as the inclusiveness of relevant stakeholders, transparency in operation, independence of the central government and other interests, and adaptability to a changing environment are prerequisites for these entities’ successful operation. Conclusions: While the CER entities evolved separately and have different responsibilities, they have adopted a set of core structural, technical, and procedural principles, including mechanisms for engaging with stakeholders, governance and oversight arrangements, and explicit methodologies for analyzing evidence, to ensure a high-quality product that is relevant to their system.
Author(s): Kalipso Chalkidou; Sean Tunis; Ruth Lopert; Lise Rochaix; Peter T. Sawicki; Mona Nasser; Bertrand Xerri
Keywords: health reform; comparative effectiveness research
Read on Wiley Online Library
Read on JSTOR
Volume 87, Issue 2 (pages 339–367) DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00560.x Published in 2009
