Table 2.
Comparative effectiveness reviews assessed a
| CER | 2009 prediction | Update commissioned by AHRQ |
|---|---|---|
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Management Strategies for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease[11] |
High |
Yes |
|
Effectiveness of Noninvasive Diagnostic Tests for Breast Abnormalities[12] |
High |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Epoetin and Darbepoetin for Managing Anemia in Patients Undergoing Cancer Treatment[13] |
High |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Analgesics for Osteoarthritis[14] |
High |
Yes |
|
Efficacy and Comparative Effectiveness of Off-Label Use of Atypical Antipsychotics[15] |
Medium |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Drug Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis in Adults[16] |
Medium |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments to Prevent Fractures in Men and Women with Low Bone Density or Osteoporosis[17] |
Medium |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Second-Generation Antidepressants in the Pharmacologic Treatment of Adult Depression[18] |
Low |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists (ARBs) for Treating Essential Hypertension[19] |
Low |
Yes |
|
Comparative Effectiveness of Therapies for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancerb[20] |
Medium |
No |
| Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Coronary Artery Diseasec[21] | Low | No |
aAHRQ, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; CER, comparative effectiveness review. bUpdate not commissioned pending publication of the PIVOT trial. cUpdate not commissioned or individual patient data meta-analysis had already been commissioned.