The ARRA Investment in CER: A Description of the Midstream Evaluation and How the Funds Were Allocated and CER Priorities Addressed
Evidence | Publications

The ARRA Investment in CER: A Description of the Midstream Evaluation and How the Funds Were Allocated and CER Priorities Addressed

Published: Dec 30, 2014
Publisher: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, vol. 3, no. 6
Health Research and Evaluation Policy Analysis
Download
Full Publication
Authors

Dominick Esposito

Pierre L. Yong

Eugene Rich

Kristin Geonnotti

Laura D. Kimmey

Key Findings
  • The overarching goals of the ARRA CER investments were to enhance the national infrastructure for conducting CER, generate new clinical evidence that could improve health care quality for priority groups of patients, and lay the groundwork to ensure the continued generation of information decision makers need to improve the nation’s health.
  • Projects generating new CER evidence or synthesizing existing evidence made up the plurality of ARRA CER projects (194) and funding ($524 million) activities. As the second-largest area of investment in the ARRA CER portfolio, data infrastructure investments accounted for nearly 100 projects and 28 percent of the funding ($302 million).
  • The ARRA CER portfolio invested $118 million to fund 53 projects with a predominant focus on dissemination and translation, $46 million to fund 43 research training and career development projects, and $29 million to fund 23 methods development projects.
  • Most of the research training and career development projects focused on research training or career development (43 of 66), and the remainder focused on CER methods development.
  • More than three-fourths of all projects in the portfolio addressed at least one priority population, condition category, or intervention category, and 56 percent addressed two or more themes. The most common priority themes addressed were cardiovascular disease (19.1 percent of all projects), racial or ethnic minorities (14.6 percent), and cancer (13.7 percent).

Aims

To describe the evaluation design of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) comparative effectiveness research (CER) investment, how funds were allocated, and how CER priorities were addressed.

Materials and Methods

Primary and secondary data included information from redacted project proposals; an investigator survey; and discussions with federal project officers, investigators, and expert panels.

Results

More than 420 projects ($1.1 billion) were awarded. Those generating new or synthesizing existing CER made up the plurality (194 percent, or $524 million). Data infrastructure projects were the second-largest area (28 percent, $302 million). More than three-fourths addressed at least one priority population, condition category, or intervention category.

Conclusions

These investments expanded the nation’s CER activities and its future capacity to conduct CER.

How do you apply evidence?

Take our quick four-question survey to help us curate evidence and insights that serve you.

Take our survey