Skip to main content

Are Real-World Data and Evidence Good Enough to Inform Health Care and Health Policy Decision-Making?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Decision Making in a World of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Abstract

We are entering the era of digitized real-world data to inform health-care and health policy decisions—including medical claims, electronic health records, sensor/real-time monitoring data, etc. This will increasingly be merged with novel other data sources—including purchasing preferences self-reporting of experience via social networks, weather, etc. Together this big data has the potential to revolutionize decision-making and help to realize the goal of a “learning health-care system.” However, there are concerns that the data are not of sufficient quality—both in terms of accuracy and completeness. Are data good enough today? If not, when will we know when they are good enough? There are multiple ongoing and potential applications of real-world data/big data including understanding the epidemiology of disease and unmet medical need, informing the development of precision medicines, informing health-care benefit design, informing quality improvement efforts, informing health technology assessments regarding access to and pricing of new therapies, assessing the incidence/prevalence of adverse events associated with marketed medications to inform regulatory labelling, informing bedside shared decision-making between patient and provider, and informing regulatory labelling decisions regarding indications, dosing, benefits in subpopulations, etc. The criteria for what are good enough are not the same across these applications. For some uses, the data we have today are already good enough. For other uses, it remains controversial whether the data are good enough. A framework is discussed that allows end users to decide whether data are of sufficient quality to inform decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Institute of Medicine (2007) The Learning Healthcare System. Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine; Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care. Olsen L, Aisner D, McGinnis JM, editors. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. p. 374

    Google Scholar 

  2. Miani C, Robin E, Horvath V, Manville C, Cave J, Chataway J (2014) Health and healthcare: assessing the real-world data policy landscape in Europe. RAND Corporation. p. 1–102. Available from: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR500/RR544/RAND_RR544.pdf. Accessed 22 Apr 2016

  3. Sackett DL (1997) Evidence-based medicine. Semin Perinatol 21(1):3–5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Goldman JJ, Shih TL (2011) The limitations of evidence-based medicine—applying population-based recommendations to individual patients. Virtual Mentor 13(1):26–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Greenwood V. Can big data tell us what clinical trials don’t? The New York Times. 2014 Oct 3; Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/05/magazine/can-big-data-tell-us-what-clinical-trials-dont.html?_r=2. Accessed 15 May 2016.

  6. Frankovich J, Longhurst CA, Sutherland SM (2011) Evidence-based medicine in the EMR era. N Engl J Med 365(19):1758–1759

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. OHSU Center for evidence-based policy. Participating Organizations. In: [website]. OHSU Center for evidence-based policy. 2016. Available from: https://www.ohsu.edu/xd/research/centers-institutes/evidence-based-policy-center/evidence/derp/participating-organizations.cfm. Accessed 15 May 2016

  8. A look at the evidence. In: Consumer reports magazine. 2011. Available from: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2011/march/health/best-buy-drugs/a-look-at-the-evidence/index.htm. Accessed 15 May 2016

  9. McDonagh MS, Jonas DE, Gartlehner G, Little A, Peterson K, Carson S et al (2012) Methods for the drug effectiveness review project. BMC Med Res Methodol 12(1):140

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Criteria for assigning grade of evidence. 2016. Available from: http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/FAQ/evidence_qual.htm. Accessed 15 May 2016

  11. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP (2008) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol 61(4):344–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. WellPoint. Use of comparative effectiveness research (CER) and observational data in formulary decision making evaluation criteria. WellPoint. 2010. pp 1–5. Available from: https://www.pharmamedtechbi.com/~/media/Images/Publications/Archive/ThePink Sheet/72/021/00720210012/20100521_wellpoint.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2016

  13. Berger ML, Martin BC, Husereau D, Worley K, Allen JD, Yang W et al (2014) A questionnaire to assess the relevance and credibility of observational studies to inform health care decision making: an ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force report. Value Health 17(2):143–156

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors [homepage on the Internet]. Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). 2016. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf. Accessed 26 Apr 2016

  15. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) (1998) Guidance for industry: providing clinical evidence of effectiveness for human drug and biological products. US Department of Health and Human Services. pp 1–23. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceCompliance/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM078749.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2016

  16. Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S (2012) House of representatives. 21st century cures: a call to action. Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives. pp 1–5. Available from: http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/analysis/21stCenturyCures/20140501WhitePaper.pdf. Accessed 26 Apr 2016

  17. Wechsler J (2016) FDA sentinel initiative expands to support clinical research. Applied clinical trials; Available from: http://www.appliedclinicaltrialsonline.com/fda-sentinel-initiative-expands-support-clinical-research. Accessed 15 May 2016

  18. Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI). Welcome to GetReal. 2016. Available from: https://www.imi-getreal.eu/. Accessed 15 May 2016

  19. Sutter S. Industry Need FDA (2016) “Engaged” before investing in observational studies. In: The pink sheet. Informa Business Intelligence, Inc. p. Article # 00160314004. Available from: https://www.pharmamedtechbi.com/Publications/The-Pink-Sheet/78/11/Industry-Need-FDA-Engaged-Before-Investing-In-Observational-Studies? Accessed 15 May 2016

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc L. Berger .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Berger, M.L., Harnett, J. (2017). Are Real-World Data and Evidence Good Enough to Inform Health Care and Health Policy Decision-Making?. In: Birnbaum, H., Greenberg, P. (eds) Decision Making in a World of Comparative Effectiveness Research. Adis, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3262-2_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3262-2_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Adis, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3261-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3262-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics