The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Methodological Standards and Patient-Centeredness in Comparative Effectiveness Research: The PCORI Perspective
Abstract
Rigorous methodological standards help to ensure that medical research produces information that is valid and generalizable, and are essential in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR). Patient-centeredness refers to the extent to which the preferences, decision-making needs, and characteristics of patients are addressed, and is the key characteristic differentiating PCOR from comparative effectiveness research. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law in 2010 created the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which includes an independent, federally appointed Methodology Committee. The Methodology Committee is charged to develop methodological standards for PCOR. The 4 general areas identified by the committee in which standards will be developed are (1) prioritizing research questions, (2) using appropriate study designs and analyses, (3) incorporating patient perspectives throughout the research continuum, and (4) fostering efficient dissemination and implementation of results. A Congressionally mandated PCORI methodology report (to be issued in its first iteration in May 2012) will begin to provide standards in each of these areas, and will inform future PCORI funding announcements and review criteria. The work of the Methodology Committee is intended to enable generation of information that is relevant and trustworthy for patients, and to enable decisions that improve patient-centered outcomes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & the PRISMA-P Group (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7647 · Cited by 13,120
Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Greenland, S., Hlatky, M. A., Khoury, M. J., Macleod, M. R., Moher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Tibshirani, R. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62227-8 · Cited by 1,597
User‐centered design for psychosocial intervention development and implementation.
Lyon, A. R., & Koerner, K. (2016) · Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice · doi:10.1111/cpsp.12154 · Cited by 478
Basch, E., Abernethy, A. P., Mullins, C. D., Reeve, B. B., Smith, M. L., Coons, S. J., Sloan, J., Wenzel, K., Chauhan, C., Eppard, W., et al. (2012) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2012.42.5967 · Cited by 476
Cohen, R. M., Greenberg, J. M., & IsHak, W. W. (2013) · JAMA Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.286 · Cited by 86
Metadata
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2012-04-18
- Volume
- 307
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1636
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2547933991
- Cited by
- 255
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 56.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Methodological Standards and Patient-Centeredness in Comparative Effectiveness Research: The PCORI Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2012.466
- The paper
- Methodological Standards and Patient-Centeredness in Comparative Effectiveness Research: The PCORI Perspective. (2012). JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.466
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.