Assessing the Population Impact of Published Intervention Studies

By Catherine Chanfreau-Coffinier, Steven M. Teutsch, Jonathan E. Fielding
June 23, 2015 | Discussion Paper

Abstract

Background: Despite greater spending on health care and biomedical research, the United States has poorer health outcomes than competitive nations. Information is needed on the potential impact of interventions to better guide resources allocation.

Objective: To assess whether research on interventions is concentrated in areas with the greatest potential population health benefit.

Design: Secondary data analysis to perform a best-case study of the potential population impact of published intervention studies.

Study selection: A random sample of 20 intervention studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2011.

Data extraction: One reviewer extracted data using a standardized form, and another reviewer verified the data.

Measurements: The incremental gain of applying the intervention versus the control estimated in quality-adjusted life years (QALY) at the population level.

Results: Of the 20 studies, 13 had a statistically significant effect size, and 3 studies accounted for 80 percent of the total population health impact. Studies of less common conditions had smaller population health impact, though greater individual level impact. Studies generally did not report the information required to estimate the anticipated population health impact.

Limitations: The heterogeneity of outcome measures and the use of multiple data sources result in a large degree of uncertainty in the estimates. The use of an intervention effect measured in a study setting is likely to overestimate its real-world impact. Although random, the sample of studies selected here may not be representative of intervention studies in general.

Conclusions: Research priorities should be heavily informed by the potential population health impact. Researchers, proposal reviewers, and funders should understand those impacts before intervention studies are initiated. We recommend that this information be uniformly included in research proposals and reports.

Introduction

Not only does the United States spend more per capita on medical care than any other nation, and more than twice as much as the average for all other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, it spends more on medical research as well. [1, 2] Yet despite the high level of spending, our health outcomes are mediocre at best; the United States ranks 26th in life expectancy and 31st in infant mortality among developed nations. [3] This discrepancy raises the question about the value derived from the governmental and nongovernmental investments in medical research. In contradistinction to basic science research, for which the goal is arguably to advance science for the development of knowledge, translational science seeks to improve health through the development of bench-to-bedside interventions and to assure their use in patients and populations that would benefit from them. To improve health measurably, translational research needs to focus on identifying interventions that are likely to provide the greatest population health benefit as well as interventions that are widely used but are ineffective or harmful. In a prior paper we proposed a set of criteria for researchers, funders, journal editors, and consumers of research to assess the importance and value of studies on health interventions—to answer the “so what” question. [4] Those criteria include the burden of disease (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs] lost due to the condition), the preventable burden (how much health burden could be alleviated if the intervention were successful), the economic value (cost and cost-effectiveness), and the additional information gained from the study (e.g., sufficient information to change an evidence-based recommendation).

Interventions may be traditional clinical interventions; changes to health care systems; or population-health interventions, such as changes in policy, interventions to address behaviors or underlying social and environmental determinants, or public health programs. Despite their potentially large impacts, population-health interventions are inadequately studied.

There are, of course, many reasons for conducting studies other than their potential aggregate health impact, including the need to address specific rare diseases or improve understanding of disease processes, though we would argue a primary goal of publicly supported research should be to conduct studies of interventions with the clear potential to improve population health and intended to be implemented rapidly. We therefore turned to a leading medical journal known for publishing cutting-edge research to estimate the likely impact of published intervention studies.

Methods

Sample Selection

We identified original articles describing an intervention study published in The New England Journal of Medicine between January and December 2011 (Figure 1). In every other issue, the title and abstract of all original articles were examined to classify articles by study design (descriptive, observational, or experimental [e.g., randomized clinical trial]) and to identify articles describing the evaluation of an intervention. Exclusion criteria included topics of mental health, cost or cost-effectiveness analysis (if there was no assessment of effectiveness), safety assessment, and system-level intervention (e.g., studies of hospital quality improvement systems). A sample of 20 articles was then randomly selected from the studies meeting the criteria. Articles excluded and not selected are listed in Tables A-1 and A-2 in the appendix.

Abstraction

The abstraction protocol was adapted from the methods developed for the Guide to Community Preventive Services. [6, 7] We used a standardized form to record information on the nature of the intervention, study population, time horizon, outcome measures, study rationale, and sources of funding (see appendix). In addition, we evaluated articles for the inclusion of information required for calculating the expected population impact of the intervention: burden of disease (incidence, prevalence, and mortality) and expected changes in quality of life. Catherine Chanfreau-Coffinier performed the literature abstraction, and Steven Teutsch reviewed it. We resolved disagreements through consensus.

Population Measures

We performed a best-case study for the expected population impact of the interventions, assuming that all patients with the targeted condition(s) were eligible to receive the treatment and would initiate the treatment. We estimated the total burden of disease and the expected population impact of the interventions using multiple sources of information. Where available we used data presented in the evaluated article. Where data were not included we used (1) statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (www.cdc.gov), (2) Cochrane reviews, (The Cochrane Collaboration conducts independent, systematic reviews of evidence to inform health decisions, and their work is available at http://www.cochrane.org/.) and (3) high-quality literature, in that order. All values and sources are listed in Table A-3 in the appendix.

Net Health Benefits

Net health benefits were calculated as lives saved and as gains in QALYs. QALYs are a measure of life expectancy in years of life adjusted for the quality of life [QOL], with an adjustment factor ranging from 1 for a perfect health state to 0 for the worst possible health state. [8] Using QALYs allows for the comparison of interventions across diverse health conditions. In our framework, QALYs gained are the differences in QALYs resulting from applying the intervention versus the control procedure in each study. QALYs were calculated using the QOL factors documented in the evaluated article whenever available; otherwise, QOL factors were collected from a comprehensive review by Tengs and Wallace [9] or high-quality QOL or cost-effectiveness literature. All values and sources are listed in Table A-3 in the appendix. The formulas used to estimate population impacts of the intervention are shown in the appendix. QALYs may be gained by saving additional years of life with the intervention and/or by increasing the quality of life over a period of time. In brief, we subtracted the gain in QALYs achieved with the intervention from the gain achieved with the control procedure. In addition, we evaluated average QALYs gained per case and average QALYs gained per life saved, if applicable.

Evaluation of the Intervention Impact at the Patient Level

The expected effect of the intervention per patient was based on the effect size for the primary outcome reported in the study. We assume that the intervention would have the same effect in real-world practice as found in the study and that the effect size would remain constant over time. The studies assessed were all efficacy studies. Thus the expected impact in practice is likely overestimated. Because many studies had small or null effect sizes, we anticipate they would have an even smaller impact in practice.

The average impact of the intervention (or control procedure) was estimated for a “typical” patient. The life expectancy of the “typical” patient at the time of treatment was based on the average age of the sample in the study, the life expectancy for people of that age reported in the 2009 United States Life Tables, [10] and the average loss of life years expected for a patient with that condition.

Evaluation of the Intervention Impact at the Population Level

The impact of the intervention (based on QALYs gained per patient) was then applied to the whole patient population. To ensure the comparability among studies, we performed calculations on the basis of the current burden of disease. When available, we included information on the treatment uptake and adherence as reported in the studies and incorporated those factors to estimate treatment effectiveness. We calculated the average QALY gain per patient as the total number of QALYs gained for an intervention divided by the number of cases expected for the condition.

To account for the inherent uncertainty, we calculated all point estimates for the population impact of the intervention using the lower and upper bound values for the variables following the methods of the Guide to Community Preventive Services. [6, 7]

Results

We examined 106 original articles describing an intervention study in 26 issues of The New England Journal of Medicine published from January to December 2011 (Figure 1). On the basis of our selection criteria, we identified 64 eligible articles and excluded five articles: three safety studies, one mental health intervention, and one system intervention (Table A-1). Random selection of 20 articles among the 59 included resulted in 20 randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies (the articles not selected are listed in Table A-2).

Most studies were U.S.-based; only six were non-U.S. or international studies. Funding sources were diverse, with nine studies publicly funded, six studies funded by industry, and five with both public and industry funding. Three studies are secondary analyses of large clinical trials. [11,12,13] Although the rationale for each study was clearly documented by the authors, information necessary to evaluate the burden of disease was present in only 50 percent of the articles, and only one study documented quality of life, which was the primary outcome of the intervention. [13]

We used the information summarized in Table A-3 to calculate the expected population impact of the intervention compared to the control procedures. The minimum and maximum expected values were calculated by applying the intervention to the entire eligible patient population (Table 1). Calculations were performed only for the 13 interventions that found a significant difference in effect between the intervention and the control procedure. The estimated effect sizes vary greatly both in magnitude and in uncertainty across studies (Figure 2). Some of the variations reflect differences in the patient population that may benefit from the intervention: if the eligible patient population is large, even a modest intervention effect may result in a large gain in total QALYs. Consequently, we find that a small number of interventions account for the majority of the population impact, with three of the interventions accounting for more than 80 percent of all expected gains in QALYs. In contrast, the six interventions with the lowest impact produced an expected total QALY gain of less than 1 percent, or 100,000 QALYs.

When viewed on a per patient basis, many of the interventions were found to have a small effect. The exceptions were the cases of less common conditions (type 1 diabetes, [14] aplastic anemia, [15] and Turner syndrome [16]) for which interventions were found to have a large impact at the individual level.

Discussion

We estimated the likely population impact of intervention studies published in a preeminent journal. A significant difference in effect between the intervention and the control procedure was found in only 13 of the 20 evaluated studies. We observed a wide variation in effect sizes across the studies, both in magnitude and in uncertainty. In particular, we found that most interventions with large population-level impact had a modest intervention effect at the individual level, whereas several interventions for less common or rare conditions had small population effects, but relatively large patient-level impact. Therefore, both population-based and patient-based measures are important to consider, as they may result in very different ranking of the impacts. [17]

The National Commission on Prevention Priorities has assessed the population impact of clinical preventive services recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, [18] the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has assessed the effectiveness of care, and the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute has prioritized important clinical care questions. A recent National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute study showed large differences in the potential impacts of trials it sponsored. [5] We believe that translational research should focus on those interventions with the greatest potential population health impact.

By systematically sampling 20 intervention studies from a single leading medical journal, all of which were randomized trials, we have demonstrated the feasibility of assessing population health impacts if the study interventions were to be adopted in practice. Remarkably, few of the studies actually report the information needed to assess the population impact, though we were able to obtain the data needed from other sources. Even fewer calculate the overall population impact, and they rarely provide cost or comparisons of costs to health or economic benefits. The lack of this information means reviewers and readers must infer the relevant population and basic information such as the baseline life expectancy and quality of life. It is reasonable to expect researchers to determine or at least estimate the impacts they anticipated prior to embarking on intervention studies. Their ability to do so would be significantly enhanced by more standardized and accessible values for quality of life.

We assessed the incremental value of the interventions compared to the control procedures used in the trials. Choice of trial comparator is of singular importance, and selection of placebo or suboptimal therapy as comparators will overstate the potential impact of interventions. To understand the importance and incremental value of the intervention, trial comparators should include the best available, most reasonable alternative. This was not always the case.

Limitations

This study has a number of important limitations. The studies included represent a small sample of intervention studies, all of which were published in the same journal in the same year. Thus they may reflect the selection criteria of the journal or may not be representative of intervention studies more generally. Several sources were used to obtain parameter estimates for calculating the population impact, and these sources do not use consistent methods. All studies in our sample were randomized trials, and selection criteria used in each study limit their generalizability to the population as a whole and likely overestimate adherence in both the intervention and control groups. In addition, studies are of limited duration, so estimating longterm effects adds uncertainty. In each case, however, we erred on the side of choosing parameters that would provide the greatest potential impact. Hence, these results are “best case” scenarios that provide an upper bound on population health impacts; real-world impacts are likely to be smaller. Despite these limitations, there are very large differences in population health impact among the studies, differences not plausibly due to methodological decisions or uncertainty. What is apparent is that most studies have at best small or no population health effects and that a small number have substantial population effects.

Three studies were secondary analyses of already-published RCTs. In those cases, we did not assess the impact of the trials as a whole, but rather assessed the effect of the secondary analysis. Although we believe our estimates of population health impacts are reasonable, there is variability in the underlying parameters (e.g., variations by ethnic or racial groups, by geography, or in the definition of certain conditions) and data sources (e.g., estimates can come from cross-sectional studies or clinical environments, be self-reported, be clinician diagnosed, or have definitive diagnoses). These variations introduce uncertainty into the assessment process, and thus the findings should be considered estimates rather than precise determinations. In addition, there are differences in timing of benefits and harms and differential impacts among population groups. Consequently, small differences among studies we examined should be interpreted with caution. In prior work [18] the population health impact of recommended clinical preventive services differed by several orders of magnitude and services were grouped into five impact categories to reduce attention to small differences among them and to emphasize the enormous, often poorly understood differences in effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. As the number of studies assessing the population health accumulates, a similar approach could minimize overinterpretation of small differences.

We studied the results of published studies, not the original research proposals themselves. Nonetheless, the likelihood of finding little population effect could often have reasonably been anticipated beforehand. The secondary analyses of previously published trials might have been done to expand indications, potentially to identify a subgroup for which use of a technology found ineffective in the primary analysis could be justified.

Because of the limited resources for research, we must always make choices about which studies to conduct. The paucity of studies of population health interventions (policies and programs) reflects both the research priorities of decision makers as well as the complexity of conducting such studies. We believe that research priorities should be heavily informed by the potential population health impact and that researchers, proposal reviewers, and funders need to understand those impacts before intervention studies are initiated. This approach was recently used to estimate the expected value of a proposed study [19] and to justify the undertaking of a new controlled trial. [20] To that end, we recommend that the information necessary to estimate the impact of the proposed intervention be uniformly included in research proposals and reports. All requests for proposals of interventions should explicitly require that study proposals project the population health impact of the study using standard procedures such as those we used, and funders should assess the projections and use them in funding decisions. Journals should require that the information be included in reports of intervention studies, and reviewers should be tasked with evaluating the adequacy of the assessments. The addition of this new component in the peer-review process will likely require additional training of the reviewers. By the same token, journals should insist that this information be conveyed effectively to readers so the latter can use the results more effectively. Constant attention to the “so what” question should help direct our public translational research investments in ways that provide the greatest good for the investors and primary beneficiaries, the American public.

 

Appendix – The Importance of Published Intervention Studies

Methods
Table A-1: Articles Reporting an Intervention Excluded from the Sample and Reason for the Exclusion
Table A-2: Articles Reporting an Intervention Not Selected by the Random Draw
Table A-3: Information and Sources on Interventions, Disease Burden, and Expected Impact of the
Intervention (Lives Saved, Cases Averted, and QALY Gains)
References for the Appendix

Methods

Abstraction Tool

Data from each of the 20 studies included in the sample were abstracted using the following grid:

 


References for Manuscript

  1. Clinical Innovation and Technology. 2013.NIH director warns that US research funding is falling behind, calls for new focus on innovation (presentation, University of Maryland School of Medicine, November 27, 2013), http://www.clinical-innovation.com/press-releases/nih-directorwarns-us-research-funding-falling-behind-calls-new-focus-innovation; accessed June 15, 2015.
  2. Chakma, J., G. H. Sun, J. D. Steinberg, S. M. Sammut, and R. Jagsi. 2014. Asia’s ascent: Global trends in biomedical R&D expenditures. New England Journal of Medicine 370(1):3–6.
  3. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD health data, 2013. Paris: OECD, 2013.
  4. Fielding, J. E. and S. M. Teutsch. 2013. So what? A framework for assessing the potential impact of intervention research. Preventing Chronic Disease 10:120160.
  5. Gordon, D., W. Taddei-Peters, A. Mascette, M. Antman, P. G. Kaufmann, and M. S. Lauer. 2013. Publication of trials funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. New England Journal of Medicine 369(20):1926–1934.
  6. Briss, P. A., S. Zaza, M. Pappaioanou, J. Fielding, L. Wright-De Aguero, B. I. Truman, D. P. Hopkins, P. D. Mullen, R. S. Thompson, S. H. Woolf, V. G. Carande-Kulis, L. Anderson, A. R. Hinman, D. v. McQueen, S. M. Teutsch, and J. R. Harris. 2000. Developing an evidence-based Guide to Community Preventive Services: Methods. The Task Force on Community Preventive Services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 18(Suppl. 1):35–43.
  7. V. G. Carande-Kulis, M. V. Maciosek, P. A. Briss, S. M. Teutsch, S. Zaza, B. I. Truman, et al. Methods for systematic reviews of economic evaluations for the Guide to Community Preventive Services. Task Force on Community Preventive Services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 18(Suppl. 1):75–91.
  8. Klarman, H. E., J. O. Francis, and G. D. Rosenthal. 1968. Cost effectiveness analysis applied to treatment of chronic renal disease. Medical Care 6(1):48–54.
  9. Tengs, T. O. and A. Wallace. 2000. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Medical Care 38(6):583–637.
  10. Arias, E. 2014. United States life tables, 2009. (National Center for Health Statistics; Hyattsville, MD.
  11. H. C. Gerstein, M. E. Miller, S. Genuth, F. Ismail-Beigi, J. B. Buse, D. C. Goff , Jr., et al. 2011. Long-term effects of intensive glucose lowering on cardiovascular outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine 364(9):818–828.
  12. C. R. Smith, M. B. Leon, M. J. Mack, D. C. Miller, J. W. Moses, L. G. Svensson, et al. 2011. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. New England Journal of Medicine 364(23):2187–2198.
  13. D. J. Cohen, B. Van Hout, P. W. Serruys, F. W. Mohr, C. Macaya, P. den Heijer, et al. 2011. Quality of life after PCI with drug-eluting stents or coronary-artery bypass surgery. New England Journal of Medicine 364(11):1016–1026.
  14. I. H. de Boer, W. Sun, P. A. Cleary, J. M. Lachin, M. E. Molitch, M. W. Steffes, et al. 2011. Intensive diabetes therapy and glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine 365(25): 2366–2376.
  15. P. Scheinberg, O. Nunez, B. Weinstein, P. Scheinberg, A. Biancotto, C. O. Wu, et al. 2011. Horse versus rabbit antithymocyte globulin in acquired aplastic anemia. New England Journal of Medicine 365(5) :430–438.
  16. J. L. Ross, C. A. Quigley, D. Cao, P. Feuillan, K. Kowal, J. J. Chipman, et al. 2011. Growth hormone plus childhood low-dose estrogen in Turner’s syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 364(13):1230–1242.
  17. Gross, C. P., G. F. Anderson, and N. R. Powe. 1999. The relation between funding by the National Institutes of Health and the burden of disease. New England Journal of Medicine 340(24):1881–1887.
  18. Maciosek, M. V., A. B. Coffield, T. J. Flottemesch, N. M. Edwards, and L. I. Solberg. 2010. Greater use of preventive services in U.S. health care could save lives at little or no cost. Health Affairs (Millwood) 29(9):1656–1660.
  19. Wong, W. B., S. D. Ramsey, W. E. Barlow, L. P. Garrison, Jr., and D. L. Veenstra. 2012. The value of comparative effectiveness research: Projected return on investment of the RxPONDER trial (SWOG S1007). Contemporary Clinical Trials 33(6):1117–1123.
  20. Havrilesky, L. J., J. P. Chino, and E. R. Myers. 2013. How much is another randomized trial of lymph node dissection in endometrial cancer worth? A value of information analysis. Gynecologic Oncology 131(1):140–146.
  21. Velazquez, E. J., K. L. Lee, M. A. Deja, A. Jain, G. Sopko, A. Marchenko, et al. 2011. Coronaryartery bypass surgery in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. New England Journal of Medicine 364(17): 1607–16.
  22. West, R., W. Zatonski, M. Cedzynska, D. Lewandowska, J. Pazik, P. Aveyard, et al. 2011. Placebo-controlled trial of cytisine for smoking cessation. New England Journal of Medicine 365(13):1193–1200.
  23. Villareal, D. T., S. Chode, N. Parimi, D. R. Sinacore, T. Hilton, R. Armamento-Villareal, et al. 2011. Weight loss, exercise, or both and physical function in obese older adults. New England Journal of Medicine 364(13):1218–1229.
  24. Altman, D., T. Vayrynen, M. E. Engh, S. Axelsen, and C. Falconer. 2011. Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse. New England Journal of Medicine 364(19):1826–1836.
  25. Goss, P. E., J. N. Ingle, J. E. Ales-Martinez, A. M. Cheung, R. T. Chlebowski, J. WactawskiWende, et al. 2011. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. New England Journal of Medicine 364(25):2381–2391.
  26. Sterling, T. R., M. E. Villarino, A. S. Borisov, N. Shang, F. Gordin, E. Bliven-Sizemore, et al. 2011. Three months of rifapentine and isoniazid for latent tuberculosis infection. New England Journal of Medicine 365(23):2155–2166.
  27. Giuliano, A. R., J. M. Palefsky, S. Goldstone, E. D. Moreira, Jr., M. E. Penny, C. Aranda, et al. 2011. Efficacy of quadrivalent HPV vaccine against HPV infection and disease in males. New England Journal of Medicine 364(5):401–411.
  28. Kim, J. J.and S. J. Goldie. 2009. Cost effectiveness analysis of including boys in a human papillomavirus vaccination programme in the United States. British Medical Journal 339: b3884.
  29. Louie, T. J., M. A. Miller, K. M. Mullane, K. Weiss, A. Lentnek, Y. Golan, et al. 2011. Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection. New England Journal of Medicine 364(5):422–431.
  30. Boeckxstaens, G. E., V. Annese, S. B. des Varannes, S. Chaussade, M. Costantini, A. Cuttitta, et al. 2011. Pneumatic dilation versus laparoscopic Heller’s myotomy for idiopathic achalasia. New England Journal of Medicine 364(19): 1807–1816.
  31. Feldman, T., E. Foster, D. D. Glower, S. Kar, M. J. Rinaldi, P. S. Fail, et al. 2011. Percutaneous repair or surgery for mitral regurgitation. New England Journal of Medicine 364(15):1395–1406.
  32. Felker, G. M., K. L. Lee, D. A. Bull, M. M. Redfield, L. W. Stevenson, S. R. Goldsmith, et al. 2011. Diuretic strategies in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine 364(9):797–805.
  33. Goldhaber, S. Z., A. Leizorovicz, A. K. Kakkar, S. K. Haas, G. Merli, R. M. Knabb, et al. 2011. Apixaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients. New England Journal of Medicine 365(23):2167–2177.
  34. Madhi, S. A., S. Nachman, A. Violari, S. Kim, M. F. Cotton, R. Bobat, et al. 2011. Primary isoniazid prophylaxis against tuberculosis in HIV-exposed children. New England Journal of Medicine 365(1):21–31.
  35. Nguyen-Khac, E., T. Thevenot, M. A. Piquet, S. Benferhat, O. Goria, D. Chatelain, et al. 2011. Glucocorticoids plus N-acetylcysteine in severe alcoholic hepatitis. New England Journal of Medicine 365(19):1781–1789.

 

References for the Appendix

  1. Arora, S., K. Thornton, G. Murata, P. Deming, S. Kalishman, D. Dion, B. Parish, T. Burke, W. Pak, J. Dunkelberg, M. Kistin, J. Brown, S. Jenkusky, M. Komaromy, and C. Qualls. 2011. Outcomes of treatment for hepatitis C virus infection by primary care providers. New England Journal of Medicine 364:2199–2207.
  2. Bonow, R. O., G. Maurer, K. L. Lee, T. A. Holly, P. F. Binkley, P. Desvigne-Nickens, J. Drozdz, P. S. Farsky, A. M. Feldman, T. Doenst, D. S. Berman, J. C. Nicolau, P. A. Pellikka, K. Wrobel, N. Alotti, F. M. Asch, L. E. Favaloro, L. She, E. J. Velazquez, R. H. Jones, and J. A. Panza. 2011. Myocardial viability and survival in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1617–1625.
  3. Huskins, W. C., C. M. Huckabee, N. P. O’Grady, P. Murray, H. Kopetskie, L. Zimmer, M. E. Walker, R. L. Sinkowitz-Cochran, J. A. Jernigan, M. Samore, D. Wallace, D. A. Goldman. 2011. Intervention to reduce transmission of resistant bacteria in intensive care. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1407–1418.
  4. Jain, R., S. M. Kralovic, M. E. Evans, M. Ambrose, L. A. Simbartl, D. S. Obronsky, M. L. Render, R. W. Freyberg, J. A. Jernigan, R. R. Mudder, L. J. Miller, G. A. Roselle. 2011. Veterans Affairs initiative to prevent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1419–1430.
  5. Rosenheck, R. A., J. H. Krystal, R. Lew, P. G. Barnett, L. Fiore, D. Valley, S. S. Thwin, J. E. Vertrees, M. H. Liang. 2011. Long-acting risperidone and oral antipsychotics in unstable schizophrenia. New England
    Journal of Medicine 364:842–851.
  6. Adzick, N. S., E. A. Thom, C. Y. Spong, N. S. Adzick, E. A. Thom, C. Y. Spong, J. W. Brock III, M. P. Johnson, L. J., Howell, J. A. Farrell, M. E. Dabrowiak, L. N. Sutton, N. Gupta, N. B. Tulipan, M. E. D’Alton, and D. L. Farmer. 2011. A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele. New England Journal of Medicine 364:993–1004.
  7. Appel, L. J., J. M. Clark, H. C. Yeh, N. Y. Wang, J. W. Coughlin, G. Daumit, E. R. Miller III, A. Dalcin, G. J. Jerome, S. Geller, G. Noronha, T. Pozefsky, J. Charleston, J. B. Reynolds, N. Durkin, R. R. Rubin, T. A. Louis, and F. L. Brancati. 2011. Comparative effectiveness of weight-loss interventions in clinical practice. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1959–1968.
  8. Aufderheide, T. P., G. Nichol, T. D. Rea, S. P. Brown, B. G. Leroux, P. E. Pepe, P. J. Kudenchuk, J. Christenson, M. R. Daya, P. Dorian, C. W. Callaway, A. H. Idris, D. Andrusiek, S. W. Stephens, D. Hoster, D. P. Davis, J. V. Dunford, R. G. Pirrallo, I. G. Stiell, C. M. Celement, A. Craig, L. Van Ottingham, T. A. Schmidt, H. E. Wang, M. F. Weisfeldt, J. P. Oranto, and G. Sopko. 2011. A trial of an impedance threshold device in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. New England Journal of Medicine 365:798–806.
  9. Avidan, M. A., E. Jacobsohn, D. Glick, B. A. Burnside, L. Zhang, A. Villafranca, L. Karl, S. Kamal, B. Torres, M. O’Connor, A. S. Evers, S. Gradwohl, N. Lin, B. J. Palanca, and G. A. Mashour. 2011. Prevention of intraoperative awareness in a high-risk surgical population. New England Journal of Medicine 365:591–600.
  10. Bacon, B. R., S. C. Gordon, E. Lawitz, S. C. Gordon, E. Lawitz, P. Marcellin, J. M. Vierling, S. Zeuzem, F. Poordad, Z. D. Goodman, H. L. Sings, N. Boparai, M. Burroughs, C. A. Brass, J. K. Albrecht, and R. Esteban. 2011. Boceprevir for previously treated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1207–1217.
  11. Bednarek, P. H., M. D. Creinin, M. F. Reeves, C. Cwiak, E. Espey, and J. T. Jensen. 2011. Immediate versus delayed IUD insertion after uterine aspiration. New England Journal of Medicine 364:2208–2217.
  12. Busse, W. W., W. J. Morgan, P. J. Gergen, H. E. Mitchell, J. E. Gern, A. H. Liu, R. S. Gruchalla, M. Kattan, S. J. Teach, J. A. Pongracic, J. F. Chmiel, S. F. Steinbach, A. Calatroni, A. Togias, K. M. Thompson, S. J. Szefler, and C. A. Sorkness. 2011. Randomized trial of omalizumab (anti-IgE) for asthma in inner-city children. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1005–1015.
  13. Chimowitz, M. I., M. J. Lynn, C. P. Derdeyn, T. N. Turan, D. Fiorella, B. F. Lane, L. S. Janis, H. L. Lutsep, S. L. Barnwell, M. F. Waters, B. L. Hoh, J. M. Hourihane, E. I. Levy, A. V. Alexandrov, M. R. Harrigan, D. Chiu, R. P. Klucznik, J. M. Clark, C. G. McDougall, M. D. Johnson, G. L. Pride, Jr., M. T. Torbey, O. O. Zaidat, Z. Rumboldt, H. J. Cloft. 2011. Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. New England Journal of Medicine 365:993–1003.
  14. Coleman, R. E., H. Marshall, D. Cameron, D. Dodwell, R. Burkinshaw, M. Keane, M. Gil, S. J. Houston, R. J. Grieve, P. J. Barrett-Lee, D. Ritchie, J. Pugh, C. Gaunt, U. Rea, J. Peterson, C. Davies, V. Hiley, W. Gregory, R. Bell. 2011. Breast-cancer adjuvant therapy with zoledronic acid. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1396–1405.
  15. Connolly, S. J., J. Eikelboom, C. Joyner, H. C. Diener, R. Hart, S. Golitsyn, G. Flaker, A. Avezum, S. H. Hohnloser, R. Diaz, M. Talajic, J. Zhu, P. Pais, A. Budaj, A. Parkhomenko, P. Jansky, P. Commerford, R. S. Tan, K. H. Sim, B. S. Lewis, W. Van Mieghem, G. Y. H. Lip, J. H. Kim, F. Lanas-Zanetti, A. GonzalezHermosillo, A. L. Dans, M. Munawar, M. O’donnel, J. Lawrence, G. Lewis, R. Afzal, and S. Yusuf. 2011. Apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine 364:806–817.
  16. Conroy, T., F. Desseigne, M. Ychou, O. Bouché, R. Guimbaud, Y. Bécouarn, A. Adenis, J. L. Raoul, S. Gourgou-Bourgade, C. de la Fouchardiére, J. Bennouna, J. B. Bachet, F. Khemissa-Akouz, Péré-Vergé, C. Delbado, E. Assenat, B. Chauffert, P. Michel, C. Montoto-Grillot, M. Ducreux. 2011. FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1817–1825.
  17. Cypel, M., J. C. Yeung, M. Liu, M. Anraku, F. Chen, W. Karolak, M. Sato, J. Larratta, S. Azad, M. Madonik, C. W. Chow, C. Chaparro, M. Hutcheon, L. G. Singer, A. S. Slutsky, K. Yasufuku, M. de Perrot, A. F. Pierre, T. K. Waddell, and S. Keshavjee. 2011. Normothermic ex vivo lung perfusion in clinical lung transplantation. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1431–1440.
  18. de Bono, J. S., C. J. Logothetis, A. Molina, K. Fizazi, S. North, L. Chu, K. N. Chi, R. J. Jones, O. B. Goodman, Jr, F. Saad, J. N. Staffurth, P. Mainwaring, S. Harland, T. W. Flaig, T. E. Hutson, T. Cheng, H. Patterson, J. D. Hainsworth, C. J. Ryan, C. N. Sternberg, S. L. Ellard, A. Fléchon, M. Saleh, M. Scholz, E. Efstathiou, A. Zivi, D. Bianchini, Y. Loroit, N. chieffo, T. Kheoh, C. M. Haqq, and H. I. Scher. 2011. Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1995–2005.
  19. P. W. Duncan, K. J. Sullivan, A. L. Behrman, et al. 2011. Body-weight-supported treadmill rehabilitation after stroke. New England Journal of Medicine 364 :2026–2036.
  20. C. B. Granger, J. H. Alexander, J. J. McMurray, et al. 2011. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. New England Journal of Medicine 365:981–992.
  21. INIS Collaborative Group, P. Brocklehurst, B. Farrell, et al. 2011. Treatment of neonatal sepsis with intravenous immune globulin. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1201–1211.
  22. I. M. Jacobson, J. G. McHutchison, G. Dusheiko, et al. 2011. Telaprevir for previously untreated chronic hepatitis C virus infection. New England Journal of Medicine 364:2405–2416.
  23. A. Kastrati, F. J. Neumann, S. Schulz, et al. 2011. Abciximab and heparin versus bivalirudin for non-STelevation myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1980–1989.
  24. B. Lowenberg, T. Pabst, E. Vellenga, et al. 2011. Cytarabine dose for acute myeloid leukemia. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1027–1036.
  25. Martinson, N. A., G. L. Barnes, L. H. Moulton, S. P. Azen, S. S. Wu, S. E. Nadeau, B. H. Dobkin, D. K. rose, J. K. Tilson, S. Cen, and S. K. Hayden. 2011. New regimens to prevent tuberculosis in adults with HIV infection. New England Journal of Medicine 365:11–20.
  26. Mathurin, P., C. Moreno, D. Samuel, J. Dumortier, J. Salleron, F. Durand, H. Casterl, A. Dhamel, G. P. Pageaux, V. Leroy, S. Dharancy, A. Louvet, E. Boleslawski, V. Lucidi, T. Gostot, C. Francoz, C. Letoublon, D. Castaing, J. Belghiti, V. Donckier, F. R. Pruvot, and J. C. Duclos-Vallée. 2011. Early liver transplantation for severe alcoholic hepatitis. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1790–1800.
  27. McCormack, F. X., Y. Inoue, J. Moss, L. G. Singer, C. Strange, K. Nakata, A. F. Barker, J. T. Chapman, M. L. Brantly, J. M. Stocks, K. K. Brown, J. P. Lynch III, H. J. Goldberg, L. F. Young, B. W. Kinder, G. P. Downey, E. J. Sullivan, T. V. Colby, R. T. McKay, M. M. Cohen, L. Korbee, A. M. Taveira-DaSilva, H. S. Lee, J. P. Krischer, and B. C. Trapnell. 2011. Efficacy and safety of sirolimus in lymphangioleiomyomatosis. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1595–1606.
  28. Mintz-Hittner, H. A., K. A. Kennedy, A. Z. Chuang, and BEAT-ROP Cooperative Group. 2011. Efficacy of intravitreal bevacizumab for stage 3+ retinopathy of prematurity. New England Journal of Medicine 364:603–615.
  29. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, D. R. Aberle, A. M. Adams, C. D. Berg, W. C. Black, J. D. Clapp, R. M. Fagerstorm, I. F. Gareen, C. Gastonis, P. M. Marcus, and J. D. Sicks. 2011. Reduced lung cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. New England Journal of Medicine 365:395–409.
  30. O’Connor, C. M., R. C. Starling, A. F. Hernandez, P. W. Armstrong, K. Dickstein, V. Hasselblad, G. M. Heizer, M. Komajda, B. M. Massie, J. J. V. McMurray, M. S. Nieminen, C. J. Reist, J. L. Rouleau, K. Swedberg, K. F. Adams Jr., S. D. Anker, D. Atar, A. Battler, R. Botero, J. Butler, N. Clausell, R. Corbalán,  M.R. Costanzo, U. Dahlstrom, L.I. Deckelbaum, R. Diaz, M.E. Dunlap, J.A. Ezekowitz, D. Feldman, G.M. Felker, G. C. Fonarow, D. Gennevois, S. S. Gottlieb, J. A. Hill, J. E. Hollander, J. G. Howlett, M. P. Hudson, R. D. Kociol, H. Krum, A. Laucevicius, W. C. Levy, G. F. Méndez, M. Metra, S. Mittal, B. H. Oh, N. L. Pereira, P. Ponikowski, W. H. W. Tang, S. Tanomsup, J. R. Teerlink, F. Triposkiadis, R. W. Troughton, A. A. Voors, D. J. Whellan, F. Zannad, and R. M. Califf. 2011.Effect of nesiritide in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine 365:32–43.
  31. O’Shaughnessy, J., C. Osborne, J. E. Pippen, M. Yoffe, D. Patt, C. Rocha, I. C. Koo, B. M. Sherman, and C. Bradley. 2011. Iniparib plus chemotherapy in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 364:205–214.
  32. Palefsky, J. M., A. R. Giuliano, S. Goldstone, E. D. Moreira, C. Aranda, H. Jessen, R. Hillman, D. Ferris, F. Coutlee, M. H. Stoler, J. B. Marshall, D. Radley, S. Vuocolo, R. M. Haupt, D. Guris, and E. I. Garner. 2011. HPV vaccine against anal HPV infection and anal intraepithelial neoplasia. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1576–1585.
  33. Pimentel, M., A. Lembo, W. D. Chey, S. Zakko, Y. Ringel, J. Yu, S. M. Mareya, A. L. Shaw, E. Bortey, W. P. Forbes, and TARGET Study Group. 2011. Rifaximin therapy for patients with irritable bowel syndrome without constipation. New England Journal of Medicine 364:22–32.
  34. Poordad, F., J. McCone, Jr., B. R. Bacon, S. Bruno, M. P. Manns, M. S. Sulkowski, I. M. Jacobson, K. Rajender Reddy, Z. D. Goodman, N. Boparai, M. J. DiNubile, V. Sniukiene, C. A. Brass, J. K. Albrecht, and J. P. Bronowicki. 2011. Boceprevir for untreated chronic HCV genotype 1 infection. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1195–1206.
  35. Reich, K., R. G. Langley, K. A. Papp, J. P. Ortonne, K. Unnebrink, M. Kaul, J. M. Valdes. 2011. A 52- week trial comparing briakinumab with methotrexate in patients with psoriasis. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1586–1596.
  36. Sherman, K. E., S. L. Flamm, N. H. Afdhal, D. R. Nelson, M. S. Sulkowski, G. T. Everson, M. W. Fried, M. Adler, H. W. Reesink, M. Martin , A. J. Sankoh, N. Adda, R. S. Kauffman, S. George, C. I. Wright, F. Poordad F, and ILLUMINATE Study Team. 2011. Response-guided telaprevir combination treatment for hepatitis C virus infection. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1014–1024.
  37. Stiell, I. G., G. Nichol, B. G. Leroux, T. D. Rea, J. P. Ornato, J. Powell, J. Christenson, C. W. Callaway, P. J. Kudenchuk, T. P. Aufderheide, A. H. Idris, M. R. Daya, H. E. Wang, L. J. Morrison, D. Davis, D. Andrusiek, S. Stephens, S.Cheskes, R. H. Schmicker, R. Fowler, C. Vaillancourt, D. Hostler, D. Zive, R. G. Pirrallo, G. M. Vilke, G. Sopko, M. Weisfeldt, and ROC Investigators. 2011. Early versus later rhythm analysis in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. New England Journal of Medicine 365:787–797.
  38. Thera, M. A., O. K. Doumbo, D. Coulibaly, M. B. Laurens, A. Ouattara, A. K. Kone, A. B. Guindo, K. Traore, I. Traore, B. Kouriba, D. A. Diallo, I. Diarra, M. Daou, A. Dolo, Y. Tolo, M. S. Sissoko, A. Niangaly, M. Sissoko, S. Takala-Harrison, K. E. Lyke, Y. Wu, W. C. Blackwelder, O. Godeaux, J. Vekemans, M. C. Dubois, W. R. Ballou, J. Cohen, D. Thompson, T. Dube, L. Soisson, C. L. Diggs, B. House, D. E. Lanar, S. Dutta, D. G. Heppner Jr, and C. V. Plowe. 2011. A field trial to assess a blood-stage malaria vaccine. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1004–1013.
  39. Vesikari, T., M. Knuf, P. Wutzler, A. Karvonen, D. Kieninger-Baum, H. J. Schmitt, F. Baehner, A. Borkowski, T. F. Tsai, R. Clemens. 2011. Oil-in-water emulsion adjuvant with influenza vaccine in young children. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1406–1416.
  40. Viviani, S., P. L. Zinzani, A. Rambaldi, . Brusamolino, A. Levis, V. Bonfante, U. Vitolo, A. Pulsoni, A. M. Liberati, G. Specchia, P. Valagussa, A. Rossi, F. Zaja, E. M. Pogliani, P. Pregno, M. Gotti, A. Gallamini, D. Rota Scalabrini, G. Bonadonna, A. M. Gianni, Michelangelo Foundation, Gruppo Italiano di Terapie Innovative nei Linfomi, and Intergruppo Italiano Linfomi. 2011. ABVD versus BEACOPP for Hodgkin’s lymphoma when high-dose salvage is planned. New England Journal of Medicine 365:203–212.
  41. Wadden, T. A., S. Volger, D. B. Sarwer, M. L. Vetter, A. G. Tsai, R. I. Berkowitz, S. Kumanyika, K. H. Schmitz, L. K. Diewald, R. Barg, J. Chittams, and R. H. Moore. 2011. A two-year randomized trial of obesity treatment in primary care practice. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1969–1979.
  42. Zannad, F., J. J. McMurray, H. Krum, D. J. van Veldhuisen, K. Swedberg, H. Shi, J. Vincent, S. J. Pocock, B. Pitt, and EMPHASIS-HF Study Group. 2011. Eplerenone in patients with systolic heart failure and mild symptoms. New England Journal of Medicine 364:11–21.
  43. Zeiger, R. S., D. Mauger, L. B. Bacharier, T. W. Guilbert, F. D. Martinez, R. F. Lemanske Jr, R. C. Strunk, R. Covar, S. J. Szefler, S. Boehmer, D. J. Jackson, C. A. Sorkness, J. E. Gern, H. W. Kelly, N. J. Friedman, M. H. Mellon, M. Schatz, W. J. Morgan, V. M. Chinchilli, H. H. Raissy, E. Bade, J. Malka-Rais, A. Beigelman, and L. M. Taussig. 2011. Daily or intermittent budesonide in preschool children with recurrent wheezing. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1990–2001.
  44. Zeuzem, S., P. Andreone, S. Pol, S. Zeuzem, P. Andreone, S. Pol, E. Lawitz, M. Diago, S. Roberts, R. Focaccia, Z. Younossi, G. R. Foster, A. Horban, P. Ferenci, F. Nevens, B. Müllhaupt, P. Pockros, R. Terg, D. Shouval, B. van Hoek, O. Weiland, R. Van Heeswijk, S. De Meyer, D. Luo, G. Boogaerts, R. Polo, G. Picchio, and M. Beumont. 2011. Telaprevir for retreatment of HCV infection. New England Journal of Medicine 364:2417–2428.
  45. Arias, E. 2014. United States life tables, 2009. National Center for Health Statistics; Hyattsville, MD.
  46. Velazquez, E. J., K. L. Lee, M. A. Deja, A. Jain, G. Sopko, A. Marchenko, I. S. Ali, G. Pohost, S. Gradinac, W. T. Abraham, M. Yii, D. Prabhakaran, H. Szwed, P. Ferrazzi, M. C. Petrie, C. M. O’Connor, P. Panchavinnin, L. She, R. O. Bonow, G. R. Rankin, R. H. Jones, J. L. Rouleau, and STICH Investigators. 2011. Coronary-artery bypass surgery in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1607–1616.
  47. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2010. CDC/NCHS National Hospital Discharge Survey, 2010. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA.
  48. Tengs, T. O. and A. Wallace. 2000. One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Medical Care 38: 583–637.
  49. de Boer, I. H., W. Sun, P. A. Cleary, J. M. Lachin, M. E. Molitch, M. W. Steffes, B. Zinman. 2011. Intensive diabetes therapy and glomerular filtration rate in type 1 diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine 365:2366–2376.
  50. Jia, H., M. M. Zack, and W. W. Thompson. The effects of diabetes, hypertension, asthma, heart disease, and stroke on quality-adjusted life expectancy. Value Health 16 (2013): 140–147.
  51. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2011. National diabetes fact sheet: National estimates and general information on diabetes and prediabetes in the United States, 2011. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA.
  52. McQueen, R. B., S. L. Ellis, J. D. Campbell, K. V. Nair, and P. W. Sullivan. 2011. Cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring and intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 9:13.
  53. West, R., W. Zatonski, M. Cedzynska, D. Lewandowska, J. Pazik, P. Aveyard, and J. Stapleton. 2011. Placebo-controlled trial of cytisine for smoking cessation. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1193–1200.
  54. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2012. Quitting smoking among adults—United States, 2001– 2010. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA.
  55. Villareal, D. T., S. Chode, N. Parimi, D. R. Sinacore, T. Hilton, R. Armamento-Villareal, N. Napoli, C. Qualls, and K. Shah. 2011. Weight loss, exercise, or both and physical function in obese older adults. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1218–1229.
  56. Peeters, A., J. J. Barendregt, F. Willekens, J. P. Mackenbach, A. Al Mamun, and L. Bonneux. 2003. Obesity in adulthood and its consequences for life expectancy: A life-table analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine 138: 24–32.
  57. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2010. Vital signs: State-specific obesity prevalence among adults—United States, 2009. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA.
  58. Flegal, K. M., B. I. Graubard, D. F. Williamson, and M. H. Gail. 2005. Excess deaths associated with underweight, overweight, and obesity. Journal of the American Medical Association 293: 1861–1867.
  59. Hakim, Z., A. Wolf, and L. P. Garrison. 2002. Estimating the effect of changes in body mass index on health state preferences. Pharmacoeconomics 20: 393–404.
  60. Sach, T. H., G. R. Barton, M. Doherty, K. R. Muir, C. Jenkinson, and A. J. Avery. 2007. The relationship between body mass index and health-related quality of life: Comparing the EQ-5D, EuroQol VAS and SF6D. International Journal of Obesity (London) 31: 189–196.
  61. Smith, C. R., M. B. Leon, M. J. Mack, D. C. Miller, J. W. Moses, L. G. Svensson, E. M. Tuzcu, J. G. Webb, G. P. Fontana, R. R. Makkar, M. Williams, T. Dewey, S. Kapadia, V. Babaliaros, V. H. Thourani, P. Corso, A. D. Pichard, J. E. Bavaria, H. C. Herrmann, J. J. Akin, W. N. Anderson, D. Wang, and S. J. Pocock.. 2011. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. New England Journal of Medicine 364: 2187–2198.
  62. Bach, D. S., D. Siao, S. E. Girard, C. Duvernoy, B. D. McCallister, Jr., and S. K. Gualano. 2009. Evaluation of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who do not undergo aortic valve replacement: The potential role of subjectively overestimated operative risk. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 2:533–539.
  63. Reynolds, M. R., E. A. Magnuson, K. Wang, V. H. Thourani, M. Williams, A. Zajarias, C. S. Rihal, D. L. Brown, C. R. Smith, M. B. Leon, D. J. Cohen, and PARTNER Trial Investigators. 2012. Health-related quality of life after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: Results from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) Trial (Cohort A). Journal of the American College of Cardiology 60:548–558.
  64. Altman, D., T. Vayrynen, M. E. Engh, S. Axelsen, and C. Falconer. 2011. Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1826–1836.
  65. Jacklin, P. and J. Duckett. 2013. A decision-analytic Markov model to compare the cost-utility of anterior repair augmented with synthetic mesh compared with non-mesh repair in women with surgically treated prolapse. BJOG 120:217–223.
  66. Goss, P. E., J. N. Ingle, J. E. Ales-Martinez, A. M. Cheung, R. T. Chlebowski, J. Wactawski-Wende, A. McTiernan, J. Robbins, K. C. Johnson, L. W. Martin, E. Winquist, G. E. Sarto, J. E. Garber, C. J. Fabian, P. Pujol, E. Maunsell, P. Farmer, K. A. Gelmon, D. Tu, H. Richardson, and NCIC CTG MAP.3 Study Investigators. 2011. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. New England Journal of Medicine 364:2381–2391.
  67. Freedman, A. N., B. I. Graubard, S. R. Rao, W. McCaskill-Stevens, R. Ballard-Barbash, and M. H. Gail. 2003. Estimates of the number of US women who could benefit from tamoxifen for breast cancer chemoprevention. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 95:526–532.
  68. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. 2013. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2010. National Cancer Institute; Bethesda, MD.
  69. Sterling, T. R., M. E. Villarino, A. S. Borisov, N. Shang, F. Gordin, E. Bliven-Sizemore, J. Hackman, C. D. Hamilton, D. Menzies, A. Kerrigan, S. E. Weis, M. Weiner, D. Wing, M. B. Conde, L. Bozeman, C. R. Horsburgh Jr, R. E. Chaisson, and TB Trials Consortium PREVENT TB Study Team. 2011. Three months of rifapentine and isoniazid for latent tuberculosis infection. New England Journal of Medicine 365: 2155–2166.
  70. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Center for HIV/AIDS VH, STD, and TB Prevention. 2012. Epidemiologic profile 2010: Asians and native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA.
  71. Giuliano, A. R. , J. M. Palefsky, S. Goldstone, E. D. Moreira Jr, M. E. Penny, C. Aranda, E. Vardas, H. Moi, H. Jessen, R. Hillman, Y. H. Chang, D. Ferris, D. Rouleau, J. Bryan, J. B. Marshall, S. Vuocolo, E. Barr, D. Radley, R. M. Haupt, and D. Guris. 2011. Efficacy of quadrivalent HPV vaccine against HPV infection and disease in males. New England Journal of Medicine 364:401–411.
  72. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2012. Human papillomavirus–associated cancers—United States, 2004–2008. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA.
  73. Kim J. J. and S. J. Goldie. 2009. Cost effectiveness analysis of including boys in a human papillomavirus vaccination programme in the United States. British Medical Journal 339:b3884.
  74. Chesson, H. W., D. U. Ekwueme, M. Saraiya, E. F. Dunne, and L. E. Markowitz. 2011. The costeffectiveness of male HPV vaccination in the United States. Vaccine 29:8443–8450.
  75. Elbasha, E. H. and E. J. Dasbach. 2010. Impact of vaccinating boys and men against HPV in the United States. Vaccine 28:6858–6867.
  76. American Cancer Society. 2013. Cancer facts and figures, 2013. American Cancer Society; Atlanta, GA.
  77. Cohen, D. J., B. Van Hout, P. W. Serruys, F. W. Mohr, C. Macaya, P. den Heijer, M. M. Vrakking, K. Wang, E. M. Mahoney, S. Audi, K. Leadley, K. D. Dawkins, A. P. Kappetein, and Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Investigators. 2011. Quality of life after PCI with drug-eluting stents or coronary-artery bypass surgery. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1016–1026.
  78. Bakhai, A., R. A. Hill, Y. Dundar, R. Dickson, and T. Walley. 2005. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting for people with stable angina or acute coronary syndromes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews CD004588.
  79. Ross, J. L., C. A. Quigley, D. Cao, P. Feuillan, K. Kowal, J. J. Chipman, G. B. Cutler Jr. 2011. Growth hormone plus childhood low-dose estrogen in Turner’s syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 364: 1230–1242.
  80. Price, W. H., J. F. Clayton, S. Collyer, R. De Mey, and J. Wilson. 1986. Mortality ratios, life expectancy, and causes of death in patients with Turner’s syndrome. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 40:97–102.
  81. Carel, J. C., E. Ecosse, I. Bastie-Sigeac, et al. 2005. Quality of life determinants in young women with Turner’s syndrome after growth hormone treatment: Results of the StaTur population-based cohort study. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 90:1992–1997.
  82. Nadeem, M. and E. F. Roche. 2013. Health-related quality of life in Turner syndrome and the influence of key features. Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism 27(3-4):283-9.
  83. Bannink, E. M., H. Raat, P. G. Mulder, and S. M. de Muinck Keizer-Schrama. 2006. Quality of life after growth hormone therapy and induced puberty in women with Turner syndrome. Journal of Pediatrics 148:95–101.
  84. Louie, T. J., M. A. Miller, K. M. Mullane, K. Weiss, A. Lentnek, Y. Golan, S. Gorbach, P. Sears, Y. K. Shue, and OPT-80-003 Clinical Study Group. 2011. Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection. New England Journal of Medicine 364:422–431.
  85. Lucado, J., C. Gould, and A. Elixhauser. 2012. Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) in hospital stays, 2009 Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
  86. Hota S., C. Achonu, N. Crowcroft, B. Harvey, A. Lauwers, and M. Gardam. 2012. Determining mortality rates attributable to Clostridium difficile infection. Emerging Infectious Diseases 305–307.
  87. Bartsch, S. M., C. A. Umscheid, N. Fishman, and B. Y. Lee. Is fidaxomicin worth the cost? An economic analysis. Clinical Infectious Diseases 57:555–61.
  88. Stranges, P. M., D. W. Hutton, and C. D. Collins CD. 2013. Cost-effectiveness analysis evaluating fidaxomicin versus oral vancomycin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection in the United States. Value in Health 16:297–304.
  89. Scheinberg, P., O. Nunez, B. Weinstein, P. Scheinberg, A. Biancotto, C. O. Wu, and N. S. Young. 2011. Horse versus rabbit antithymocyte globulin in acquired aplastic anemia. New England Journal of Medicine 365:430–438.
  90. Viollier, R., J. Passweg, M. Gregor, G. Favre, T. Kühne, and C. Nissen. 2005. Quality-adjusted survival analysis shows differences in outcome after immunosuppression or bone marrow transplantation in aplastic anemia. Annals of Hematology 84:47–55.
  91. Brodsky, R. A. and R. J. Jones. 2005. Aplastic anaemia. Lancet 365: 1647–1656.
  92. Boeckxstaens, G. E., V. Annese, S. B. des Varannes, et al. 2011. Pneumatic dilation versus laparoscopic Heller’s myotomy for idiopathic achalasia. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1807–1816.
  93. Farrokhi, F. and M. Vaezi. Idiopathic (primary) achalasia. 2007. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 2: 38.
  94. Feldman, T., E. Foster, D. D. Glower, S. Kar, M. J. Rinaldi, P. S. Fail, R. W. Smalling, R. Siegel, G. A. Rose, E. Engeron, C. Loghin, A. Trento, E. R.Skipper, T. Fudge, G. V. Letsou, J. M. Massaro, L. Mauri, and EVEREST II Investigators. 2011. Percutaneous repair or surgery for mitral regurgitation. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1395–1406.
  95. Enriquez-Sarano, M., C. W. Akins, and A. Vahanian. 2009. Mitral regurgitation. Lancet 373:1382–1394.
  96. Felker, G. M., K. L. Lee, D. A. Bull, D. A. Bull, M. M. Redfield, L. W. Stevenson, S. R. Goldsmith, M. M. LeWinter, A. Deswal, J. L. Rouleau, E. O. Ofili, K. J. Anstrom, A. F. Hernandez, S. E. McNulty, E. J. Velazquez, A. G. Kfoury, H. H. Chen, M. M. Givertz, M. J. Semigran, B. A. Bart, A. M. Mascette, E. Braunwald, and C. M. O’Connor. 2011. Diuretic strategies in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine 364:797–805.
  97. Joseph, S. M., A. M. Cedars, G. A. Ewald, E. M. Geltman, and D. L. Mann. 2009. Acute decompensated heart failure: Contemporary medical management. Texas Heart Institute Journal 36:510–520.
  98. Gerstein, H. C., M. E. Miller, S. Genuth, et al. 2011. Long-term effects of intensive glucose lowering on cardiovascular outcomes. New England Journal of Medicine 364:818–828.
  99. Hoerger, T. J., P. Zhang, J. E. Segel, E. W. Gregg, K. M. V. Narayan, and K. A. Hicks. 2009. Improvements in risk factor control among persons with diabetes in the United States: Evidence and implications for remaining life expectancy. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 86:225–232.
  100. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Death rates for hyperglycemic crises as underlying cause per 100,000 diabetic population, by age, United States, 1980–2009, http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/mortalitydka/fratedkadiabbyage.htm (accessed March 21, 2014).
  101. Goldhaber, S. Z., A. Leizorovicz, A. K. Kakkar, S. K. Haas, G. Merli, R. M. Knabb, and J. I. Weitz. 2011. Apixaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients. New England Journal of Medicine 365:2167–2177.
  102. O’Donnell, M. and J. I. Weitz. 2003. Thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients. Canadian Journal of Surgery 46:129–135.
  103. Madhi, S. A., S. Nachman, A. Violari, S. A. Madhi, S. Nachman, A. Violari, S. Kim, M. F. Cotton, R. Bobat, P. Jean-Philippe, G. McSherry, and C. Mitchell. 2011. Primary isoniazid prophylaxis against tuberculosis in HIV-exposed children. New England Journal of Medicine 365:21–31.
  104. R. Ferrand, S. Lowe, B. Whande, L. Munaiwa, L. Langhaug, F. Cowan, O. Mugurungi, D. Gibb, S. Munyati, B. G. Williams, E. L. Corbett. 2010. Survey of children accessing HIV services in a high prevalence setting: Time for adolescents to count? Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
  105. E. Nguyen-Khac, T. Thevenot, M. A. Piquet, S. Benferhat, O. Goria, D. Chatelain, B. Tramier, F. Dewaele, S. Ghrib, M. Rudler, N. Carbonell, H. Tossou, A. Bental, B. Bernard-Chabert, and J. L. Dupas. 2011. Glucocorticoids plus N-acetylcysteine in severe alcoholic hepatitis. New England Journal of Medicine 365:1781–1789.
  106. Basra, S. and B. S. Anand. 2011. Definition, epidemiology and magnitude of alcoholic hepatitis. World Journal of Hepatology 3:108–113.

 

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31478/201506e

Suggested Citation

Chanfreau-Coffinier, C., S. M. Teutsch, and J. E. Fielding. 2015. Assessing the Population Impact of Published Intervention Studies. NAM Perspectives. Discussion Paper, National Academy of Medicine, Washington, DC. doi: 10.31478/201506e


Join Our Community

Sign up for NAM email updates