AHRQ’s EPC Program develops evidence
reports and technology assessments on topics relevant to clinical
and other health care organization and delivery issues—specifically
those that are common, expensive, and/or significant for the
Medicare and Medicaid populations. For example recent reviews have
focused on clinical conditions, such as “Treatment of Nonmetastatic
Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer” ; health delivery topics such as
“Management Strategies to Reduce Psychiatric Admissions” ; and
specific technologies such as “Imaging Techniques for Treatment
Evaluation for Metastatic Breast Cancer.” These evidence reports
include systematic reviews and technical briefs, and provide an
essential foundation from which to understand what we know from
existing research and what critical research gaps remain. These
reports, reviews, and technology assessments are based on rigorous,
comprehensive syntheses and analyses of the scientific literature
on topics. EPC reports and assessments emphasize explicit and
detailed documentation of methods, rationale, and assumptions. EPC
reports are conducted in accordance with an established policy on
financial and nonfinancial interests. These scientific syntheses
may include meta-analyses and cost analyses. The EPC Program
supports AHRQ’s mission by synthesizing and disseminating the
available research as a “science partner” with private and public
organizations in their efforts to improve the quality,
effectiveness, and appropriateness of health care. The EPC Program
is a trusted source of rigorous, comprehensive, and unbiased
evidence reviews for stakeholders. The resulting evidence reports
and technology assessments are used by Federal and State agencies,
private-sector professional societies, health delivery systems,
providers, payers, and others committed to evidence-based health
care. These end-users may use EPC Program evidence reports to
inform policy decisions, clinical practice guidelines, and other
healthcare decisions.
US Code:
42 USC Sec. 299 Name of Law: Healthcare and Research Quality
Act of 1999
Each SEADS request is a new
collection. The burden is lower as we expect fewer responses. The
nature of systematic reviews is to secure comparable evidence on
the efficacy and effectiveness of numerous treatments for health
related diseases and disorders. These reviews aim to inform
healthcare decision making by clinicians and consumers, and inform
guidance on clinical practice. The findings of these reviews are
intended to help clinicians and consumers make the best decisions
in their particular circumstances. In general, the goal for these
reports is to be completed within a year. The steps that go into
each review therefore are on a tight schedule and are not ongoing
in order to fulfill their purpose. Thus, there are no ongoing
collections of information from study sponsors and industry
stakeholders for the same topic.
On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that
the collection of information encompassed by this request complies
with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR
1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding
the proposed collection of information, that the certification
covers:
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a
benefit, or mandatory);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control
number;
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of
these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked
and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.
Form 1 Website portal for Submission of Supplemental Evidence and Data for Systematic Reviews
Jean Public Comment.msg
Attachment E -- Draft PIA.pdf
Supporting Statement Part A Comments 8.26 clean.docx
Website portal for Submission of Supplemental Evidence and Data for Systematic Reviews