ABSTRACT
The allocation of $1.1 billion to comparative effectiveness research in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 represented a paradigm shift. The people believe a broad range of constituents with a stake in the healthcare marketplace needs to understand this initiative and what it's likely to mean to them. While CER certainly offers a legitimate, if partial, solution to the real problem of cost containment, it also plays off the perception that pharmaceutical and medical device companies have managed to game the system to extract exorbitant profits, artificially raising the cost of healthcare for everyone. Regardless of the organization's relative effectiveness, it is another statement that CER is to stay and that choices will be made from among available therapies. The group's analysis suggests that 4 years into its 10-year charter, PCORI has devoted less than 40% of its research funding to actual CER.
